i like lambda calculus.
but... do you like lambda calculus?
i like lambda calculus.
i like lambda calculus.
but... do you like lambda calculus?
anyways, look at what i made: https://github.com/Zaydiscool777/pdfs/blob/main/lambda/lambda.pdf
On Fri, 12 Jun 2026 20:33:49 -0000 (UTC), Zayd Mohammed wrote:
i like lambda calculus.
I like traffic lights. But only when they’re green.
Q: Make a sentence with “lambda calculus”.
A: I like lambda calculus.
Q: Make a sentence with “lambda calculus”.
i like lambda calculus.
but... do you like lambda calculus?
anyways, look at what i made: https://github.com/Zaydiscool777/pdfs/blob/main/lambda/lambda.pdf
Zayd Mohammed <zaydm@172.24.208.1> schrieb:the plain text form is at: https://github.com/Zaydiscool777/pdfs/blob/main/lambda/lambda.tex
i like lambda calculus.
but... do you like lambda calculus?
anyways, look at what i made:
https://github.com/Zaydiscool777/pdfs/blob/main/lambda/lambda.pdf
Can you share it in plain text form?
Anyway, I like the λ-calculus. I made a λ-calculus interpreter in Haskell. It'sso, does that mean you interpreter uses Bruijn indices?
pretty neat, but not very efficient. It might be worth the trouble to add a few
more primitives like numbers just for efficiency.
My interpreter uses indices instead of variables, for example, instead of λx.λy.λz.xz(yz) I would write \\\$$##($##), where # = 0 and $ = succesor function. It uses a $ for each \ a variable skips. This avoids α-difficulties.
On Fri, 12 Jun 2026 20:33:49 -0000 (UTC), Zayd Mohammed wrote:
i like lambda calculus.
I like traffic lights. But only when they’re green.
Q: Make a sentence with “lambda calculus”.
A: I like lambda calculus.
My interpreter uses indices instead of variables, for example, instead of λx.λy.λz.xz(yz) I would write \\\$$##($##), where # = 0 and $ = succesor function. It uses a $ for each \ a variable skips. This avoids α-difficulties.
On 2026-06-16, Esrimushmoneh <lambda@dr.com> wrote:
My interpreter uses indices instead of variables, for example, instead ofso, does that mean you interpreter uses Bruijn indices?
λx.λy.λz.xz(yz) I would write \\\$$##($##), where # = 0 and $ = succesor >> function. It uses a $ for each \ a variable skips. This avoids α-difficulties.
that's cool. although i wonder why you chose to use symbols for 0 and succ, rather than just parsing numbers.
On 2026-06-16, Esrimushmoneh <lambda@dr.com> wrote:
Zayd Mohammed <zaydm@172.24.208.1> schrieb:the plain text form is at: https://github.com/Zaydiscool777/pdfs/blob/main/lambda/lambda.tex
i like lambda calculus.
but... do you like lambda calculus?
anyways, look at what i made:
https://github.com/Zaydiscool777/pdfs/blob/main/lambda/lambda.pdf
Can you share it in plain text form?
(well, techincally that's in Tex.)
so, does that mean you interpreter uses Bruijn indices?
Anyway, I like the λ-calculus. I made a λ-calculus interpreter in Haskell. It's
pretty neat, but not very efficient. It might be worth the trouble to add a few
more primitives like numbers just for efficiency.
My interpreter uses indices instead of variables, for example, instead of
λx.λy.λz.xz(yz) I would write \\\$$##($##), where # = 0 and $ = succesor >> function. It uses a $ for each \ a variable skips. This avoids α-difficulties.
that's cool. although i wonder why you chose to use symbols for 0 and succ, rather than just parsing numbers.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,124 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 18:10:57 |
| Calls: | 14,391 |
| Files: | 186,389 |
| D/L today: |
1,572 files (401M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,544,800 |
| Posted today: | 1 |