# Difference between revisions of "Haskell and mathematics/Hierarchy"

Forkiliens (talk | contribs) |
(link to Mathematical prelude discussion) |
||

Line 13: | Line 13: | ||

''I agree: semigoups like lattices are everywhere. Then there could be a uniform treatment of linear algebra, polynomial equations, operator algebra, etc.'' |
''I agree: semigoups like lattices are everywhere. Then there could be a uniform treatment of linear algebra, polynomial equations, operator algebra, etc.'' |
||

+ | |||

+ | == Notes == |
||

+ | |||

+ | This article should be merged with [[Mathematical prelude discussion]]. |

## Revision as of 19:27, 26 May 2008

**Mathematical Hierarchy**

Here is a place to discuss ideas for a mathematician-attracting hierarchy of mathematics modules that incorporate a sound algebraic class structure.

Basic algebraic structures in Haskell: ftp://ftp.botik.ru/pub/local/Mechveliani/basAlgPropos/

Categorical Approach to representing mathematical structures in Haskell: ftp://ftp.botik.ru/pub/local/Mechveliani/docon/

*For me that probably starts with the semigroup/group/ring setup, and good*
arbitrary-precision as well as approximate linear algebra support.

*I agree: semigoups like lattices are everywhere. Then there could be a uniform treatment of linear algebra, polynomial equations, operator algebra, etc.*

## Notes

This article should be merged with Mathematical prelude discussion.