Conversation

Hi Talia! I think you're completely wrong on this. I think that people who don't work in maths departments often have a view of mathematics which is quite detached from what is *actually happening in maths departments*. I don't see any reason why UIP stops me formalising maths.
2
1
It doesn't stop you, but it is one choice in a fork where univalence works just as nicely (in fact gives rise to the automation you like more easily). And it stops folks working in proof relevant mathematics; "all of math" is just a hyperbolic statement.
1
1
I was a math researcher before I went into CS, by the way. I didn't start programming until college. It is important to be nuanced in these conversations or you lose the important lessons of why Lean has been useful for you. Foundations are not why.
1
4
My understanding is two things about Lean have helped you a lot: good automation and good library support. The latter of which has been a lot of your effort. Other proof assistant designers should learn from this. Losing this nuance in discussion is a major loss for everyone
2
4
Not sure if this is part of 'good automation', or if it's more just 'tooling', but as a non-expert on theorem proving, I've appreciated Lean because it makes it easy to set up VS Code with live-updating intellisense.
1
Show replies