Hi Arnaud, you may want to look at http://mathcs.mta.ca/research/rosebrugh/Easik/
This is a java tool which allows entity design using various cat theory constraints such as sum, product and pullbacks. Brett Giles Sent from my iPhone > Message: 14 > Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:06:21 -0500 > From: Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> > Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Category theory as a design tool > To: Arnaud Bailly <arnaud.oq...@gmail.com> > Cc: Haskell Cafe <haskell-cafe@haskell.org> > Message-ID: <banlktingaplo7ysyggg1duxbw5ik1kl...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Arnaud Bailly <arnaud.oq...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> (2nd try, took my gloves off...) >> Hello Caf?, >> I have been fascinated by Cat. theory for quite a few years now, as >> most people who get close to it I think. >> >> I am a developer, working mostly in Java for my living and dabbling >> with haskell and scala in my spare time and assuming the frustration >> of having to live in an imperative word. More often than not, I find >> myself trying to use constructs from FP in my code, mostly simple >> closures and typical data types (eg. Maybe, Either...). I have read >> with a lot of interest FPS (http://homepages.mcs.vuw.ac.nz/~tk/fps/) >> which exposes a number of OO patterns inspired by FP. >> >> Are there works/thesis/books/articles/blogs that try to use Cat. >> theory explicitly as a tool/language for designing software (not as an >> underlying formalisation or semantics)? Is the question even >> meaningful? > > You might try: Category Theory for Computing > Science<http://www.cwru.edu/artsci/math/wells/pub/ctcs.html> (Barr > and Wells) > > and Conceptual Mathematics: a first introduction to > categories<http://books.google.com/books/about/Conceptual_mathematics.html?id=o1tHw4W5MZQC> > (Lawvere) > > "Kinship and Mathematical Categories" (by Lawvere) is also interesting. > > -Gregg > >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Arnaud >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Haskell-Cafe mailing list >> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20110622/9f65e9e9/attachment-0001.htm> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:59:11 +0200 > From: Arnaud Bailly <arnaud.oq...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Category theory as a design tool > To: Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> > Cc: Haskell Cafe <haskell-cafe@haskell.org> > Message-ID: <BANLkTikUtRA4=0qhluq6kzm6ijtc4wh...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello Greg and Alexander, > Thanks for your replies. Funnily, I happen to own the 3 books you mentionned > :-) My interest in category theory is a long standing affair... > > Note that owning a book, having read (most of) it and knowing a theory (or > at least its principles and main concepts) is really quite a different thing > from being able to apply it. Although I am certainly able to understand the > Yoneda lemma, I am certainly unable to recognize the opportunity of using > that knowledge to derive some new knowledge about something else. And being > able to define a topoi is very different from being able to construct one or > infer one out of a given category. This is an actual limitation of myself of > course. > > Alexander's advice about using diagrams and simple notations is something I > often try to do and something which most of the times end in writing a bunch > of functions and data types in Haskell... What I am really looking for is a > more systematic way of thinking about systems (or system fragments, or > components) in a categorical way, perhaps starting with a bunch of arrows in > some abstract category with objects as components and trying to infer new > objects out of categorical consturctions which are made possible by the > current diagrams (eg. what would be a pullback in such a category ? What > would be its meaning ? Does the question itself have a meaning ?). > > Maybe this is really foggy and on the verge to fall into "abstract > nonsense"... > > Best regards, > arnaud > _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe