Conversation

Brendan Zabarauskas
@brendanzab
So… the early work on ADTs (Algebraic Data Types) was originally based on ADTs (Abstract Data Types)! This seems less surprising now that I think about it… I think? 😅
Quote Tweet
Nate Foster
@natefoster
·
Replying to @natefoster @JAldrichPL and @TaliaRinger
For example, here's a nice survey: courses.engr.illinois.edu/cs576/sp2017/r
3
11
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Brendan Zabarauskas
@brendanzab
I… think so? But maybe I am wrong. Like, I was imagining that an algebraic data type in FP is kind of an abstract datatype anyway, seeing as the underlying representation is usually abstract? Eg. A type + introductions + eliminators?
1
1
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Brendan Zabarauskas
@brendanzab
Yeah it’s weird! I was thinking that you’d need to somehow leave it up to the language implementation? Kind of a bit like using staging to avoid the circularity (with a bunch of handwaves).
1