27

Most of us know the correspondence between combinatory logic and lambda calculus. But I've never seen (maybe I haven't looked deep enough) the equivalent of "typed combinators", corresponding to the simply typed lambda calculus. Does such thing exist? Where could one find information about it?

1 Answers1

18

The expressive completeness of the typed combinators compared to the simply typed lambda calculus has been demonstrated. For each untyped combinator, one needs a whole family of typed combinators. For example, one has

  • $\mathbf{I}_{\alpha\to\alpha}$
  • $\mathbf{K}_{\alpha\to(\beta\to\alpha)}$
  • $\mathbf{S}_{\alpha\to(\beta\to\gamma)\to(\alpha\to\beta\to(\alpha\to\gamma))}$

for all combinations of simple types $\alpha,\beta$ and $\gamma$.

Alternatively, just think of the types as type schemes (or polymorphic types) and enter them into Haskell and voila: combinators.

Raphael
  • 73,212
  • 30
  • 182
  • 400
Dave Clarke
  • 20,345
  • 4
  • 70
  • 114