Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   julesh (julesh@mathstodon.xyz)'s status on Sunday, 19-Jan-2025 23:54:06 JST julesh

   I wonder what it would be like to take this more seriously and build a dependently typed Prolog: there are no functions, only relations, and you can run relations using a backtracking operational semantics

   https://mathstodon.xyz/@julesh/113719332154511313

   • Embed this notice
     MysteriousBenji (mysteriousbenji@mathstodon.xyz)'s status on Monday, 20-Jan-2025 00:42:16 JST MysteriousBenji

     in reply to

     @julesh @julesh sounds like an interesting idea! Although dependent types etc is hard enough for me as is (I’ve used lean a bit, but really don’t know what I’m doing most of the time), so it hurts my head a bit trying to work out how that would work with relations as the core concept. Like if a function is replaced by a more general relation, 2$/5 would be the relation equivalent of a pi-type?

   • Embed this notice
     Martin Escardo (martinescardo@mathstodon.xyz)'s status on Monday, 20-Jan-2025 03:34:38 JST Martin Escardo

     in reply to

     @julesh My final year UG project was a type system for Prolog. At that time, in the late 1980's, I didn't know about dependent types.