Difference between revisions of "Haskell and mathematics/Hierarchy"
Forkiliens (talk | contribs) |
(link to Mathematical prelude discussion) |
||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
''I agree: semigoups like lattices are everywhere. Then there could be a uniform treatment of linear algebra, polynomial equations, operator algebra, etc.'' |
''I agree: semigoups like lattices are everywhere. Then there could be a uniform treatment of linear algebra, polynomial equations, operator algebra, etc.'' |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Notes == |
||
+ | |||
+ | This article should be merged with [[Mathematical prelude discussion]]. |
Revision as of 19:27, 26 May 2008
Mathematical Hierarchy
Here is a place to discuss ideas for a mathematician-attracting hierarchy of mathematics modules that incorporate a sound algebraic class structure.
Basic algebraic structures in Haskell: ftp://ftp.botik.ru/pub/local/Mechveliani/basAlgPropos/
Categorical Approach to representing mathematical structures in Haskell: ftp://ftp.botik.ru/pub/local/Mechveliani/docon/
For me that probably starts with the semigroup/group/ring setup, and good arbitrary-precision as well as approximate linear algebra support.
I agree: semigoups like lattices are everywhere. Then there could be a uniform treatment of linear algebra, polynomial equations, operator algebra, etc.
Notes
This article should be merged with Mathematical prelude discussion.