13 ms·
I like this way of looking at things. I've been (as a studied amateur) reading and thinking about this topic for a long time. In some implementations of logic
by phaedrus 7y ago
I like this way of looking at things. I've been (as a studied amateur) reading and thinking about this topic for a long time. In some implementations of logic programming, disjunction is analogous to iteration or sequence (do A then do B) and conjunction is analogous to nested loops or map (map all A with all B).
If structure is more fundamental than logic, it's not mysterious why the procedural interpretation of logic programs comes out the way it does - it follows from the structure underpinning the logic.
- mikorym 7y agoMac Lane started out in logic before category theory was invented and I think this had a positive influence on his pedagogical style in writing, for example, textbooks. Does what you say have anything to do with probability theory (e.g.: the set space B given that A is true)? There are of course the basic adjunctions that apply to quantifiers and connectives (e.g.: the adjoints to the preimage). Is iteration and nesting as you mention similar to this?