[Haskell-cafe] Pierce on type theory and category theory

[Derek Elkins]

On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 16:18 -0500, Creighton Hogg wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/25/07, Philippa Cowderoy <flippa at flippac.org> wrote:
>         On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Seth Gordon wrote:
>         
>         > Are Benjamin C. Pierce's _Types and Programming Languages_
>         and/or _Basic
>         > Category Theory for Computer Scientists_ suitable for
>         self-study?
>         >
>         
>         Basic Category Theory depends on your mindset somewhat. TaPL
>         is great 
>         though, and frequently recommended. The follow-up is also
>         good.
> 
> Basic Category Theory is cute, but I think the exercises are sometimes
> phrased strangely.  In some ways, the book makes more sense if you've
> already seen these ideas once & are trying to get a more CS
> perspective of the math.  I'll probably be alone in this, but I think
> Mac Lane is a fantastic book for learning category theory.  It's hard,
> but if you trudge along and do the exercises you learn quite a bit.
> It's fun! 

I didn't learn Category Theory from Mac Lane (Categories for the Working
Mathematician for those out of the know), but I agree that it is a very
good introduction and an enjoyable read.  It does have good exercises.
It should also make a passing good reference.