Lambda calculus/Talk

< Lambda calculus

HomePage | Recent changes | View source | Discuss this page | Page history | Log in |

Printable version | Disclaimers | Privacy policy

Really excellent work on this. When I saw the initial version, I went ahead and made a stub for Y combinator, admittedly for humor reasons, but perhaps something about some of the combinators would be nice. :) -- EdwardOConnor


When this article talks about renaming formal arguments:

x. λ y. y x) (λ x. y)     to     λ z. zx. y)

It doesn't make sense to me.

- It's an information loss, because we don't know what z is.

- It conflicts with the discussion about normal forms, since then any expression can be transformed to another one just by calling it λ z. z.

But it is a very interesting topic, and I'm certainly learning from this page. -- forgotten gentleman


Maybe there should be a note that this is the untyped lambda calculus, and that there are also several typed lambda calculi.