5 ms·
We're not using "type theory" the same way, I think. I'm thinking in terms of - simply typed lambda calculus - System F - dependent type theory (ML
by gugagore 11mo ago
We're not using "type theory" the same way, I think. I'm thinking in terms of
- simply typed lambda calculus
- System F
- dependent type theory (MLTT)
- linear types
- row types
- and so on
But it's subtle to talk about. It's not like there is a single type theory that underlies Typescript or Rust, either. These practical languages have partial, (and somewhat post-hoc) formalizations of their systems.
- pjmlp 11mo agoFor starters, "On the use of LISP in implementing denotational semantics" https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/319838.319866 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/319838.319866 Type theory in CS isn't a synonymous with whatever Haskell happens to do.