4 ms·
The author criticizes some design choices made by the paper's authors as not being simple enough. However, in fairness to that paper, it's aiming for dependentl
by cvoss 3y ago
The author criticizes some design choices made by the paper's authors as not being simple enough. However, in fairness to that paper, it's aiming for dependently typed lambda calculus and, for reasons of continuity of exposition, is probably making sub-optimal choices up front that pay off later. The distinction between inferable and checkable types, for example, doesn't really pay off until you need to do beta-reduction in the type checker. The author of the present article has the luxury of stopping early, with just an STLC implementation.
- Hirrolot 3y agoI don't kind of agree with your statement, since I earlier implemented a 80-line dependent lambda calculus [1]. I think dependent types make type checking a bit more involved due to non-trivial type equality, but that's all about it. [1] https://gist.github.com/Hirrolot/27e6b02a051df333811a23b97c375196 https://gist.github.com/Hirrolot/27e6b02a051df333811a23b97c3...