<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Native Type Theory · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.04672/</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/2102.04672/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Native Type Theory — mentioned by siraben</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26203789</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2102.04672:26203789</guid><pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:59:30 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; For now we explore the language of a topos. There are multiple views, and often its full power is not used. Toposes support geometric logic, predicate logic, and moreover dependent type theory. We emphasize the latter: dependent types are expressive and pervasive, yet underutilized in mathematics. The next step of the article is the realization that a topos[0] has this expressive capability from the get-go. There&amp;#x27;s a nice list of clarifying examples in the paper[1], starting at the bottom of page 2, for instance, stacks with push and pop, untyped lambda calculus, monad comprehension syntax…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.04672/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LO</category></item></channel></rss>
