<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Sound and Complete Bidirectional Typechecking for Higher-Rank Polymorphism with Existentials and Indexed Types · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1601.05106/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1601.05106/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Sound and Complete Bidirectional Typechecking for Higher-Rank Polymorphism with Existentials and Indexed Types — mentioned by throwaway17_17</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24604523</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1601.05106:24604523</guid><pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2020 05:55:09 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I certainly have a lot of recommendations that are topic adjacent, but most of my comment comes from mental revision. I have a horrible habit of reliving previous arguments and trying to find out what I could have said better to win the argument. I had an argument with a law school classmate who had a Masters in Mathematics (now a PhD) while we were on a road trip from Paris to Normandy, during summer abroad, and then ‘invented/discovered’ nature of mathematics was the real crux of the argument. I have spend the last 12 years going over and over and over that argument trying to win it and my…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1601.05106/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.PL</category></item></channel></rss>
