A common link I did not expect to find between category theory and Haskell programming is that if your types line up, it's very very unlikely that you're wrong

@socks wait i thought the whole thing of Haskell was that it was category theory but programming? :0

@alexandria Well, sort of! There is a lot of category stuff involved but you don't need to know actual category theory (as in the branch of mathematics) to do it

And now that I'm studying actual category theory I'm seeing parallels and it's neat

@socks @alexandria uhhhm akchually hask is not a category

(sorry for the shitpost reply i liked the conversation but i just didnt know what to say and im awkward)


@thornAvery Eheh, it's fine. I didn't know that actually, I'm still learning category stuff and have only applied it to topology so far, I haven't seen how it relates to Haskell other than just intuition

Hopefully that will change soon, it's one of the topics I'm thinking about looking into for my master's thesis

@socks ah you’re probably ahead of me, I started Hasklel and since then hav ebeen trying to learn more category theory

the shitpost comes down to (at least in my understanding) that a lot of haskell’s category theory pretends that values cant crash or hang forever because otherwise a lot of assumptions break, so all the category theory holds up but theres a big asterisk for *unless something crashes or hangs forever

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Emil Socks' personal instance!