Lambda Calculus: The foundation of functional programming, and the simplest programming language

Lambda "Calculus" is a extremely concise way to represent logic and computing - just like a Turing machine. Instead of a Turing machine's mechanical and step by step way of computing, lambda calculus looks much more similar to regular math and "computes" by substituting and simplifying.
Timestamps:
00:00 intro
00:36 logical explanation
02:20 formal explanation
06:47 currying
08:47 church encoding for numbers
12:02 recursion
--------------
My website: tonyzhang.net
My Github: github.com/Tony1324
Contact me: hello@tonyzhang.net

Пікірлер: 36

  • @RoseS-mf8ye
    @RoseS-mf8ye3 ай бұрын

    This is the best lambda calculus video I've watched of all. Thank you!

  • @herbiejames5637
    @herbiejames5637 Жыл бұрын

    Obviously understanding the value of lambda calculus is in exploring how robust it is on an abstract level, but it would be great to see this in an applied context as well! Thank you for your content!

  • @giuliopimenoff
    @giuliopimenoff Жыл бұрын

    Thank you so much, this was such a great explanation

  • @jonathandyment1444
    @jonathandyment144411 күн бұрын

    Yesterday I heard of Lambda Calculus for the first time. It is something that is right up my street and I look forward to understanding it soon. However, for now, I am encountering barrage after barrage of geeky drivel from one geek back to himself and his fellow geeks who are entertaining one another with the notion that they have explained this thing clearly and adequately.

  • @irok1
    @irok1 Жыл бұрын

    Multiplication without recursion was crazy to see. Really showcases the possibilities of lambda calculus. Great video, any chance you could increase your volume slightly?

  • @primenumberbuster404
    @primenumberbuster404 Жыл бұрын

    Haskell is goated

  • @matematicke_morce
    @matematicke_morce Жыл бұрын

    Great video, by far the best explanation I've seen on the topic! My only critique is that the animations were a bit too fast, especially in the part about basic arithmetic operations

  • @blueoxygenurawr404

    @blueoxygenurawr404

    Ай бұрын

    ikrr speedy gonazalez

  • @miketurn5
    @miketurn59 ай бұрын

    Extremely interesting way of computing already curious to learn more about catergory theory!

  • @101nka
    @101nka5 ай бұрын

    Great video! well explained

  • @anakimluke
    @anakimluke Жыл бұрын

    thanks for the video! I find the topic so interesting!

  • @anakimluke

    @anakimluke

    Жыл бұрын

    ps. your next video is on category theory!!?? even more interested now!!

  • @nilcipher1351
    @nilcipher13514 ай бұрын

    I finally understand the y-combinator now.

  • @monsterhunter8595
    @monsterhunter85955 ай бұрын

    Very good video!

  • @plablo_plablo
    @plablo_plablo25 күн бұрын

    Can you enumerate each of the lambda calculus functions in order of the number of bits of information that it takes to represent their function?

  • @ivandrofly
    @ivandrofly10 ай бұрын

    Good one thanks

  • @beantown_billy2405
    @beantown_billy24058 ай бұрын

    3:05 does the function return itself (i.e. return a function), or the value it received?

  • @raphaeld9270

    @raphaeld9270

    5 ай бұрын

    It is an error in the video it seems : `f(x) =x ` is the Identity function and just returns the input value as its output. 12:26 is closer to a function that "returns itself".

  • @LambdaJack

    @LambdaJack

    2 ай бұрын

    Which function!? A composition specialized to it's recursive specialization is it's recursive specialization. A better name than Y could be "recursive", as in "(recursive compositio)". "id" as composition does not _specify_ at all what should be done, so it could be anything. As a Degenerate Case a Composition can take the Self-Reference and do nothing with it.

  • @beantown_billy2405

    @beantown_billy2405

    2 ай бұрын

    @@LambdaJack The function at 3:05, f(x)=x

  • @chakkawatsonaruea5088
    @chakkawatsonaruea5088 Жыл бұрын

    Great video. I wished you putting a little more emphasis on, explicit putting parentheses on lambda abstraction vs no explicit parentheses. For example: Lambda x.x y Is different then: (Lambda x.x) y Sorry if bad English.

  • @TonyZhang01

    @TonyZhang01

    Жыл бұрын

    Definitely. I hoped that the use of parentheses was pretty clear based on the examples and what I wrote, and also because it is used the same way as they are normally used, so if I focused on talking about it it might seem more confusing than it actually is

  • @joejeffrey1436
    @joejeffrey14363 ай бұрын

    Instead of using church encodings a great alternative is PCF xx

  • @tsunningwah3471
    @tsunningwah34713 ай бұрын

    有沒有中文的

  • @jacobcohen76
    @jacobcohen76 Жыл бұрын

    First!

  • @incognitohacks4850

    @incognitohacks4850

    Жыл бұрын

    Ackshually

  • @alonelyphoenix8942

    @alonelyphoenix8942

    11 ай бұрын

    Why

  • @paulomarcos.5585
    @paulomarcos.5585Ай бұрын

    λ Beautiful λ

  • @basilalharbi3293
    @basilalharbi3293 Жыл бұрын

    Second

  • @tsunningwah3471
    @tsunningwah34713 ай бұрын

    chinz

  • @kahnfatman
    @kahnfatman11 күн бұрын

    I am happy that the Romans did not invent lambda Calculus -- otherwise buildings worldwide must bear the mark of Church Encoding f(f(f(f(f(f(f(f(f(f(fx))))))))))))

  • @user-je7dq7uc9m
    @user-je7dq7uc9m5 ай бұрын

    The quality of information Is exelent but the way how It Is explained Is really low level. Really Fast to have time to be understand. Sonetimes It looks that It Is an automatic voice that speak. I really Belive that this video Is superwow for the content but It Is terribly hard to really understand the content.

  • @MarkVolkmann
    @MarkVolkmann2 ай бұрын

    You say that the full definition of the add function is 🐑fxmn. (m f) (n f x). Sorry, I haven’t found a way to input the lambda character on an iPad, so I used the lamb emoji. How can I walk through the steps to apply that function? Is it like this? 🐑fxmn. (m f) (n f x) f x 2 3 (2 f) (3 f x) What do I do from here?

  • @MarkVolkmann

    @MarkVolkmann

    2 ай бұрын

    I think I found an answer. (λfxmn. (m f) (n f x)) 2 3 -- Substitute 2 for m and 3 for n. λfx. (2 f) (3 f x) -- Substiture the λ terms for 2 and 3. λfx. (λfx.f (f x) f) (λfx.f (f (f x)) f x) -- Apply the arguments f and x in the last term. λfx. (λfx.f (f x) f) (f (f (f x))) -- Apply the argument f in the last term. λfx. (λx.f (f x)) (f (f (f x))) -- Apply the argument `(f (f (f x)))` to the function on its left. λfx. f (f (f (f (f x)))) -- This is the definition of the number 5.

  • @MarkVolkmann

    @MarkVolkmann

    2 ай бұрын

    I haven’t been able to work out a similar set of steps to demonstrate multiplication though. I could use help with that.