Talk:Posset

Is it possible that Posset is implementing a probability monad, as discussed in "Build your own probability monads"? Corbin (talk) 15:31, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I will also take a look at your other suggestion: [[1]]

Reading the first sections of the article I indeed clearly see the resemblance with Posset; I would say that I am only implementing a list monad, though. I haven't really thought about how to deal with things as probabilities. I do wonder how advanced such a list monad is and whether what I am trying to do with Posset in just an uncomplete and more complicated version of that. I'll still have to read the rest of the article though, but you've already given me enoughstuff to think about, thanks! BarryNL (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

TCness

This doesn't seem like a good candidate for a proof by implementing BF. It seems like it might be much simpler to implement the S and K combinators. Or am I wrong? --Quintopia (talk)

Thanks for you comment. I wanted to test whether the language was TC, but I did not know how. When I came here they mentioned implementing BF as a way to test this and I tried. I found that I was missing a list-like structure and went back to the drawing board. Why would BF be a less good candidate? I am not that familiar with S and K combinators; why would it be much simpler to proof TCness using S and K combinators? BarryNL (talk) 09:39, 29 December 2021 (UTC)