session 2

haskell/README.md

@@ -38,3 +38,9 @@ Because it is the simplest recursive data structure. It is a recursive data stru
 
 The tree is simply too complex. Linked lists are easy.
 
+## [16th of March - Deriving types]
+
+> How does one do this systematically?
+
+> Lazy and singly-linked lists, what's the relation?
+

haskell/sessions/16_03/notes.md

@@ -10,6 +10,10 @@
 | Proof on lists | Proving properties of functions that operate on lists | 😕 |
 | Proof on trees/ADTs | Proving properties of functions that operate on trees or ADTs | 😕 |
 
+
+## Deducing types systematically
+
+### (:).(:)
 ```hs
 expr = (:) . (:)
 
@@ -41,24 +45,24 @@ expr :: a -> [[a] -> [a]] -> [[a] -> [a]]
 ```
 
 
+### `f = \x y -> x (x (x y))` [^1]
 
 ```hs
 f = \x y -> x (x (x y))
 ```
 
-Rigorous solution of the above.
-
-
-## Look into
+## Questions
 > How does one do the equations?
 
-> CLI is functional lol
+> CLI is functional?
 
-> Lazy and singly-linked lists
+> Lazy and singly-linked lists, what's the relation?
 
-> Y combinator - ?
+> Y combinator?
 
 
 ## Resources
 - [course](https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~cis1940/spring15/lectures.html)
-- [standard list](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.21.0.0/docs/Data-List.html)
+- [standard list](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.21.0.0/docs/Data-List.html)
+
+[^1]: need to find the actual rigorous way of doing this