[Haskell-cafe] Lambda Calculus: Bound and Free formal definitions

[Gregg Reynolds]

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Mark Spezzano <mark.spezzano at chariot.net.au
> wrote:

> Duh, Sorry. Yes, there was a typo
>
> the second one should read
>
> If E is a combination E1 E2 then X is bound in E if and only if X is bound
> in E1 or is bound in E2.
>

Seems odd.  I recommend you always work from at least three different texts.
 Here's Hindley and
Seldin<http://www.amazon.com/Lambda-Calculus-Combinators-Introduction-Roger-Hindley/dp/0521898854/ref=dp_ob_title_bk>
:

"An occurrence of a variable x in a term P is called

   - *bound* if it is in the scope of a \x in P  (NB:  using \ as lambda)
   - *bound and binding* iff it is  the x in \x
   - *free* otherwise"

The tricky question is: bound to what, exactly?

-Gregg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20101229/aa449b15/attachment.htm>