Programming with Categories
brendanfong.com
Programming with Categories
1–10 of 113 posts
Re: Programming with Categories
#2Videos of the lectures from last year:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUBEB9QlNCM
Re: Programming with Categories
#3"We will assume no background knowledge on behalf of the student, starting from scratch on both the programming and mathematics."
This is a fantastic "side effect" of the fact that category theory isn't built on any other mathematical knowledge. You don't even need even any arithmetics for that.
Re: Programming with Categories
#4In my experience, Monad, Applicable, and Monoid are probably the only ones I'd use in Haskell, and maybe none of them in languages without good inference and general support.
Pretty wild ideas, though. Fair chance they'd be more confusing than using more specifically named instances, but solid ideas where the class instance documents that you're using the pattern, instead of describing the preferred interface.
Re: Programming with Categories
#5These guys wrote "An Invitation to Applied Category Theory." It's an awesome book, and I'm super excited for these lectures.
Re: Programming with Categories
#6As someone who respects functional programming (because it removes geniuses from competing in my space) here's a nice video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADqLBc1vFwI
What is the beautiful monospace font in the pdf here http://brendanfong.com/programmingcats_files/cats4progs-DRAF...?
Re: Programming with Categories
#7"We will assume no background knowledge on behalf of the student, starting from scratch on both the programming and mathematics." This is a fantastic "side effect" of the fact that category theory isn't built on any other mathematical knowledge. You don't even need even any arithmetics for that.
to get super meta, one could say that the opposite is true: arithmetic requires categories
Re: Programming with Categories
#8In my experience, Monad, Applicable, and Monoid are probably the only ones I'd use in Haskell, and maybe none of them in languages without good inference and general support. Pretty wild ideas, though. Fair chance they'd be more confusing than using more specifically named instances, but solid ideas where the class instance documents that you're using the pattern, instead of describing the preferred interface.
There is sort of a "jump" from those to the ones less oriented around (->) but truer to the math, but I can assured I have in fact used https://hackage.haskell.org/package/categories (a prime example of the latter sort) in production and it was genuinely useful.
Re: Programming with Categories
#9David Spivak and other folks at Azimuth Forum[0] have been great at providing high quality discussions on ideas in this course and others. Many thanks.
Re: Programming with Categories
#10As someone who respects functional programming (because it removes geniuses from competing in my space) here's a nice video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADqLBc1vFwI What is the beautiful monospace font in the pdf here http://brendanfong.com/programmingcats_files/cats4progs-DRAF... ?
> What is the beautiful monospace font in the pdf
t1xtt, from the txfonts package, freely available