2024/09/29

Newest at the top

2024-09-30 00:23:42 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2024-09-30 00:22:00 +0200 <hololeap> andrewboltachev: https://www.parsonsmatt.org/2019/03/19/sum_types_in_sql.html ?
2024-09-30 00:18:55 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn
2024-09-30 00:17:13 +0200 <andrewboltachev> if I generalize the idea (which I want) and the "generalized table" has also coproducts, e.g. either "pickup" or "delivery" (for a web store like Amazon perhaps) then how do they map coproduct onto Set
2024-09-30 00:16:22 +0200tromp(~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl) (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
2024-09-30 00:15:47 +0200machinedgod(~machinedg@d50-99-47-73.abhsia.telus.net) machinedgod
2024-09-30 00:14:54 +0200 <andrewboltachev> but I believe it only works for them 'cause single "database table" is like a product of fields: (e.g. first_name, last_name, email, password etc)
2024-09-30 00:13:51 +0200 <andrewboltachev> in, for example "Categorical Databases" by David Spivak et al they talk about a "Database instance" functor C -> Set
2024-09-30 00:13:06 +0200 <andrewboltachev> coproducts (in ADTs) have been a problem (or main point of interest?) for me in this (bigger) idea that I research
2024-09-30 00:11:20 +0200Eoco(~ian@128.101.131.218) Eoco
2024-09-30 00:10:30 +0200 <dolio> I.E. functions.
2024-09-30 00:10:25 +0200 <andrewboltachev> ah
2024-09-30 00:10:21 +0200 <dolio> No. Exponentials will.
2024-09-30 00:09:57 +0200 <andrewboltachev> dolio: Maybe coproduct will give rise for contravariant functors in the idea you've given
2024-09-30 00:09:22 +0200 <andrewboltachev> https://app.diagrams.net/#G1lKco0mv66sGjTyMSMU1g-ogSE5PIbdzc#%7B%22pageId%22%3A%22YBh8yTivGdvy1ecIg6Zf%22%7D
2024-09-30 00:08:09 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2024-09-30 00:06:40 +0200 <dolio> But all the examples were covariant functors.
2024-09-30 00:06:12 +0200 <dolio> Also, depending on what exactly you want to do, you might need not just numbers, but lists indicating whether the argument is covariant or contravariant, and so on.
2024-09-30 00:06:09 +0200tromp(~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl)
2024-09-30 00:04:34 +0200 <andrewboltachev> Yes. thanks a lot for the idea! I'll research it
2024-09-30 00:03:57 +0200 <dolio> Yes. But what you're talking about is assembling many different arities of functors into a single category. So that requires having some way of relating different arities to make any sense.
2024-09-30 00:03:07 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn
2024-09-30 00:02:26 +0200 <andrewboltachev> ok F is a functor. that's how we make a functor from more than one set to one essentially
2024-09-30 00:01:45 +0200 <dolio> A functor.
2024-09-30 00:01:10 +0200 <andrewboltachev> dolio: well, Set^3 is a category of triplets like (a, a', a'')
2024-09-30 00:01:03 +0200tromp(~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl) (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
2024-09-29 23:59:28 +0200 <andrewboltachev> dolio: so, is n a number (e.g. 3) and Set^3 -> Set a function from three sets to one?
2024-09-29 23:57:11 +0200 <andrewboltachev> ncf: no. just trying to proof that I made something real, not just idea
2024-09-29 23:54:15 +0200 <dolio> Anyhow, something like that is a possibility.
2024-09-29 23:54:02 +0200 <dolio> Possibly with some kind of naturality involved.
2024-09-29 23:53:34 +0200ChaiTRex(~ChaiTRex@user/chaitrex) ChaiTRex
2024-09-29 23:53:22 +0200 <dolio> You can create a category where objects are pairs (n, F : Set^n -> Set). Then, an arrow (m, F) -> (n, G) explains how to select a list of n sets from a list of m sets, together something that maps F applied to the m sets to G applied to the n sets selected in the first part.
2024-09-29 23:53:13 +0200ChaiTRex(~ChaiTRex@user/chaitrex) (Remote host closed the connection)
2024-09-29 23:52:35 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2024-09-29 23:52:33 +0200 <ncf> are we supposed to read these 2759 lines to understand this "intuitively very clear" thing you're talking about?
2024-09-29 23:52:20 +0200Eoco_(~ian@128.101.131.218) (Quit: WeeChat 4.1.1)
2024-09-29 23:51:23 +0200 <andrewboltachev> I only cannot reason about it category-theoretically
2024-09-29 23:50:59 +0200 <andrewboltachev> What I need seems intuitively very clear, I already implemented alsmost all that I need: https://github.com/andrewboltachev/matcher/blob/master/src/Logicore/Matcher/Core.hs
2024-09-29 23:48:04 +0200troojg(~troojg@user/troojg) troojg
2024-09-29 23:47:19 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn
2024-09-29 23:47:02 +0200 <andrewboltachev> 'cause real goal is to refactor this data structure by, say, applying a function to some of "leaf nodes"
2024-09-29 23:44:06 +0200 <andrewboltachev> *category Set and functors
2024-09-29 23:42:52 +0200 <andrewboltachev> yet to be honest one idea I had is using sets and functors. e.g. if I have type Int, I can construct [Int]
2024-09-29 23:41:59 +0200 <andrewboltachev> "fst" arrow from (_, _) might even point to itself. similar to data Stream a = Cons a (Stream a)
2024-09-29 23:40:44 +0200 <andrewboltachev> one example is Int is a type with 0 parameters. other example maybe other type, even the same like another (_, _)
2024-09-29 23:40:08 +0200 <dolio> No, what is the codomain object?
2024-09-29 23:39:51 +0200 <andrewboltachev> (_, _) is a product type with two parameters :-) sort of...
2024-09-29 23:39:16 +0200 <dolio> But what actually is it? :)
2024-09-29 23:38:57 +0200 <andrewboltachev> dolio: codomain is something that will be in place of the first element of (_, _)
2024-09-29 23:38:55 +0200 <monochrom> No. But for each set X and Y, (X,Y) is a set, most people write XxY.