3 ms·
Yes! Basically I preferred solutions that avoided W, since you're then working in a subset of the language that is definitely terminating and affine. (although
by oisdk 6y ago
Yes! Basically I preferred solutions that avoided W, since you're then working in a subset of the language that is definitely terminating and affine.
(although in this case I just didn't find I = WK)
I should actually add a note about that, since a few people have pointed it out.
- thedufer 6y ago> Basically I preferred solutions that avoided W, since you're then working in a subset of the language that is definitely terminating and affine. Ah, that makes a lot of sense. I mostly just thought my version was the obvious one - my first thought of how to do nothing was to duplicate something and then drop one of the dupes. I have very little grounding in lambda calculus, though, and generally find the other combinators harder to reason about.