TIL that the "SKK = I" thing I've been carrying around in my head for at least 7 years now is not actually true intensionally, I never bothered to check
Prikaži ovu nit
I mean, the way I rationalise Wikipedia's statement that SKK = I is only true extensionally is that, even though it works out on paper if you beta-reduce, the equation as is is not true _in the language of combinators_ because there's no way to reduce SKK there...I guess?
-
-
Tweet je nedostupan.
- Još 5 drugih odgovora
-
-
-
That’s right: for all term t, SKKt = It, but SKK and I are both normal forms.
-
ah, thanks for clarifying!
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.