Viewing profile — giraj
giraj
HN member- Joined
- Thu, Aug 07, 2014, 2:00 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 119
- Public activity
- 41 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About giraj
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
- story
-
comment
Comment #41045207
The construction of the type 'Map ' is entirely standard in languages like Agda and Coq (and I bet Idris too). In these languages, Type is itself a type, and can be treated like an…
- story
-
comment
Comment #36599389
You're welcome! And likewise, thanks for the interesting reply. I'm afraid I have no knowledge of your field, and no idea whether there are good tools and libraries for formalising…
-
comment
Comment #36551955
I can't speak for kxyvr, but let me chime in as a mathematician who does formalise my theorems. There's no issue with representing various foundations (e.g. ZFC) on a computer -- f…
-
comment
Comment #36542776
That is an extremely uncharitable take. I find that most mathematicians care deeply that their proofs are correct.
-
comment
Comment #36542021
Mechanized proofs ensure the correctness of the results they prove. That's useful. Indeed, the point of the article was that Voevodsky sought out proof assistants in order to ensur…
-
comment
Comment #36541735
You're not wrong, but most mathematicians aren't working on (or even interested in) foundations. Not saying what you mentioned isn't math (I think it is), but my point still stands…
-
comment
Comment #36541590
For the math that you mention, I would suggest looking at mathlib ( https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib ). I agree that the foundations of Coq are somewhat distanced fr…
-
comment
Comment #36539812
Most mathematicians aren't interested in refactoring their mathematical "codebase", nor experimenting with axioms. They simply want to understand and discover more math. The reason…
-
comment
Comment #36539654
For those interested in formalisation of homotopy type theory, there are several (more or less) active and developed libraries. To mention a few: UniMath ( https://github.com/UniMa…
-
comment
Comment #36374227
Oh My Git! looks really cool and useful, thanks for mentioning it! I find it incredible that it's funded by the Prototype Fund ( https://prototypefund.de/project/oh-my-git/ ), and …
-
comment
Comment #36005791
The paper argues against those who think that "programming should strive to be more mathematical" through the development and adoption of formal methods. It points out that "more m…
-
comment
Comment #35919151
Also "I am excited to welcome Linda Yaccarino as the new CEO of Twitter" (current front-page) is tagged 'javascript', which isn't particularly relevant.
-
comment
Comment #35881877
They explain that they added an "in-app donations appeal" at the end of 2022, so I imagine that would be it.
-
comment
Comment #35592500
The speed of KaTeX is great, but the lack of support for diagrams (a la tikz-cd) is what makes KaTeX unsuitable for general adoption by mathematicians (e.g., mathoverflow.net and a…
-
comment
Comment #35542640
As a researcher, this sounded interesting so I had a look. The first paper that caught my eye ( https://paperlist.io/post/247381561 ) has a bunch of "generic" (lacking substance; c…
-
comment
Comment #35041971
Okay, thanks! But doesn't this still mean you have to compile ocaml (with flambda) yourself?
-
comment
Comment #35041856
I updated the link to point to the docs, which are more informative. As far as I understand, flambda is an intermediate representation of OCaml which allows for a number of optimis…
-
comment
Comment #35040770
I was hoping this post would mention using OCaml with flambda[1] enabled. At least for my work, flambda seems to yield a ~10% speed up when compiling things. Can you get OCaml bina…
-
comment
Comment #32493448
Maybe! You're certainly correct that there's a difference between knowing Lean (or a given proof assistant) vs. knowing mathlib (or some specific library). It doesn't seem to me th…
-
comment
Comment #32490266
This sounds like a cool demo, but I find it hard to imagine it being useful. For one, in order to check the output you need to be proficient enough that you might as well write the…
-
comment
Comment #29528979
There was a thread about this roughly two weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29349240
-
comment
Comment #28476721
You're right, there's a missing step. By "a monoid M in the category C" we mean that M is an object in C along with two morphisms "unit" : 1 -> M and "multiplication" : M x M -> M …
-
comment
Comment #24912543
I wouldn't be surprised to see anything related to type-theory on here. And I disagree that many people doing HoTT today are proposing it as an alternative foundation in anything e…