X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=advanced_topics%2Fmonads_in_category_theory.mdwn;h=2b433d274c22093f4041cf5edd38069a2bf35a6e;hb=0fbb8868c90353ef094c89e096a12f69e54af15b;hp=44ab78665ab4af653c1e91c0aabde0997ebb6274;hpb=b27052e5da57c36b2cf9dc2f18d7dcf102a841f6;p=lambda.git
diff --git a/advanced_topics/monads_in_category_theory.mdwn b/advanced_topics/monads_in_category_theory.mdwn
index 44ab7866..2b433d27 100644
--- a/advanced_topics/monads_in_category_theory.mdwn
+++ b/advanced_topics/monads_in_category_theory.mdwn
@@ -202,15 +202,23 @@ Let φ
and γ
be members of `T`, that is they
Since composition is associative I don't specify the order of composition on the rhs.
-In other words, `<=<` is a binary operator that takes us from two members φ
and γ
of `T` to a composite natural transformation. (In functional programming, at least, this is called the "Kleisli composition operator". Sometimes it's written φ >=> γ
where that's the same as γ <=< φ
.)
+In other words, `<=<` is a binary operator that takes us from two members φ
and γ
of `T` to a composite natural transformation. (In functional programming, at least, this is called the "Kleisli composition operator". Sometimes it's written φ >=> γ
where that's the same as γ <=< φ
.)
-φ
is a transformation from `F` to `MF'`, where the latter = `MG`; (M γ)
is a transformation from `MG` to `MMG'`; and `(join G')` is a transformation from `MMG'` to `MG'`. So the composite γ <=< φ
will be a transformation from `F` to `MG'`, and so also eligible to be a member of `T`.
+φ
is a transformation from `F` to `MF'`, where the latter = `MG`; (M γ)
is a transformation from `MG` to `MMG'`; and `(join G')` is a transformation from `MMG'` to `MG'`. So the composite γ <=< φ
will be a transformation from `F` to `MG'`, and so also eligible to be a member of `T`.
Now we can specify the "monad laws" governing a monad as follows:
+
(T, <=<, unit) constitute a monoid ++ +That's it. Well, there may be a wrinkle here. + +`test` + +I don't know whether the definition of a monoid requires the operation to be defined for every pair in its set. In the present case,
γ <=< φ
isn't fully defined on `T`, but only when φ
is a transformation to some `MF'` and γ
is a transformation from `F'`. But wherever `<=<` is defined, the monoid laws are satisfied:
-That's it. Well, there may be a wrinkle here. I don't know whether the definition of a monoid requires the operation to be defined for every pair in its set. In the present case, γ <=< φ
isn't fully defined on `T`, but only when φ
is a transformation to some `MF'` and γ
is a transformation from `F'`. But wherever `<=<` is defined, the monoid laws are satisfied:
+`test`
(i) γ <=< φ is also in T @@ -347,7 +355,7 @@ So our **(lemma 2)** is:-Finally, we substitute
((join G') -v- (M γ) -v- φ)
for γ <=< φ
in the monad laws. For simplicity, I'll omit the "-v-".
+Finally, we substitute ((join G') -v- (M γ) -v- φ)
for γ <=< φ
in the monad laws. For simplicity, I'll omit the "-v-".
for all φ,γ,ρ in T, where φ is a transformation from F to MF', γ is a transformation from G to MG', R is a transformation from R to MR', and F'=G and G'=R: