A big chunk of Haskell can be represented with a typed Lambda Calculus, but it would be very tricky to turn, say, hGetLine into a Lambda expression.<div><br></div><div>Tom / amindfv</div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Costello, Roger L. <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:costello@mitre.org">costello@mitre.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hi Folks,<br>
<br>
Are these statements accurate:<br>
<br>
1. The Haskell language is a layer of abstraction on top of Lambda Calculus.<br>
<br>
2. Haskell programs may be expressed entirely using Lambda expressions.<br>
<br>
3. The non-Lambda stuff in Haskell is syntactic sugar to make Haskell programs easier to write.<br>
<br>
4. The field of Lambda Calculus is formal and rich and enables powerful properties of Lambda expressions to be proven.<br>
<br>
5. A Haskell program may be translated to consist entirely of Lambda expressions. Then, Lambda Calculus may be employed to prove powerful properties about the program.<br>
<br>
/Roger<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Beginners mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Beginners@haskell.org">Beginners@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>