CS etc

[r_transpose_p]

I'm slowly getting the impression that the field I knew of as "computer science" when I was an undergrad (remember when the undergraduate catalog listed a "scientific computing track"? CS majors don't do that shit anymore) is slowly schisming into a bunch of only-tangentially-related fields

Comments

[catamorphism]

I don't see why there's an inherent reason why you couldn't understand PL theory without getting another degree, if you put enough time into it. It's all just logic.

[angelbob]

Sure. There's nothing magic about a degree. But he would need work/effort roughly equivalent to a different degree.

[catamorphism]

I don't believe that it would be that much work. I work on PL theory, and most of my own difficulties learning the field have been due to my lack of mathematical maturity. If I'd started with a math Ph.D., it would have saved me a lot of time. Doesn't matter what kind of math.

(Whether he should want to is a different question...)

[r_transpose_p]

I am scared shitless of category theory.

Also : I was mighty pissed when people started using category theory for one of my favorite control theory topics : Hybrid systems are systems in which a discrete computational thing controls discontinuous switching for the dynamics of otherwise continuous control systems. I was all excited about it as a research area because

1. the uses of it are obvious in the 'everything is networked and control is done by embedded computers' world
2. I know a lot more discrete math than most control theorists
3. Its new, and, until recently, nobody had said anything deep about them

Then some fucker* figures out that you can use category theory to transform theorems about non-linear differential equations style control onto theorems about the discrete components of hybrid systems and hybrid systems in general.

Now, if I want to make a big splash in this area, I have to

1. Understand the common category theory transformations being used here
2. Exploit the fact that discrete theorems are easier than continuous

[catamorphism]

I'm also somewhat scared of category theory.

In PL, the history of category theory is that some people were all like "Wow, you can use category theory to describe EVERYTHING!" but then practical results of this fact failed to materialize and so most people have moved on. [*]

[*] Flagrantly incomplete and biased history.

[r_transpose_p]

Hey, I give it the benefit of the doubt, cause those things called "functors" in ML are pretty useful things.

I'm a big proponent of the view that "is-a" (a.k.a. "inheritance") is not the only useful relationship between things.

[catamorphism]

The origin of the term "functor" as used in ML is fairly unrelated to the kind of category theory I'm talking about (it originated as a loose analogy, IIUC).

(But some of your other friends would probably know far better than I would.)