Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with lambda-calculus
Search options answers only
not deleted
user 261
Use this tag when asking a question that is not about a specific Lambda-calculus such as pure, typed, etc.
15
votes
Accepted
Is there something special about weak head normal form used with proof assistants?
The application rule in a dependent type system looks a bit like this:
$$\newcommand{\judge}[3]{{#1} \vdash {#2} : {#3}}
\newcommand{\jeq}[3]{{#1} \vdash {#2} \equiv {#3}}
\frac{\displaystyle
\judge{\ …
- 2,083