Tony Morris wrote:
I'd like throw in another vote for TAPL. I've been reading it lately
and it
honestly makes type theory feel fairly simple and natural. I think
Pierce's
writing is very clear, but occasionally the exercises make the problem
sound
harder than it is and it gets a little confusing. A friend of mine has the
same problem with his category theory book.
Same here!
I found his Category Theory book quite difficult and I will have to
revisit it. I have only just started TaPL, but I am enjoying it thoroughly.
I once sat down and tried to read about Category Theory. I got almost
nowhere though; I cannot for the life of my figure out how the
definition of "category" is actually different from the definition of
"set". Or how a "functor" is any different than a "function". Or...
actually, none of it made sense.
It didn't sound terribly interesting anyway. I'll stick to group theory...
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
