<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Call-by-name Gradual Type Theory · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1802.00061/</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/1802.00061/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Call-by-name Gradual Type Theory — mentioned by hackermailman</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16933244</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1802.00061:16933244</guid><pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:17:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The concrete examples the author is looking for, where it&amp;#x27;s easier to analyze programs according to their behavior instead of their imperative structure, is Per Martin-Löf&amp;#x27;s paper Constructive Mathematics and Computer Programming (DOI: 10.1016/S0049-237X(09)70189-2). For a brief and intuitive explanation, see this post by Robert Harper on the RedPRL prototype that uses cubical computational type theory https://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2018/01/15/popl-2018-t... You can also have your legacy cake and eat it too with this excellent recent paper on gradual typing…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1802.00061/"&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>
