[Haskell] Math behind Haskell

[Cale Gibbard]

On 23/09/2007, Albert Y. C. Lai <trebla at vex.net> wrote:
> Tomas Caithaml wrote:
> > Any other suggestions?
>
> I don't think topology is much needed for Haskell. Whatever little is
> needed manifests as lattice theory already. Topology has other uses in
> CS, but take note that topological spaces relevant to CS are seldom
> Hausdorff, whereas most math courses spend all the time on Hausdorff spaces.

However, topology is one place to get good examples with which to
build intuition for category theory, so it's possibly worth looking
into from that perspective. There are lots of nice examples like the
Seifert-van Kampen theorem, which can be eloquently summarised by
saying that the fundamental groupoid functor preserves pushouts.