Talk:Higher-order abstract syntax

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Structure of the article[edit]

I have just restructured the article using the current text only (no additions or removals), but it is still not optimal. I have named the first section Relation to first-order abstract syntax, but it has two purposes:

define higher-order abstract syntax
show how it relates to first-order abstract syntax

I think it is better to split these concepts. -- eboy 16:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use in logical frameworks[edit]

I think the first sentence of this section is overly broad. Simply using metalevel binders for object level binding isn't sufficient to classify as "higher-order abstract syntax". For instance, this metalevel binding technique is used widely in nominal term embeddings, yet nominal embeddings are first-order, not higher-order.

In fact, the article doesn't make clear what, to me, is the defining feature of HOAS and what sets HOAS apart from nominal embeddings and de Bruijn levels: the use of function spaces for modeling binding. You have to scroll three quarters of the article length until you come to some hint as to why HOAS includes "higher-order" in the name. DPMulligan (talk) 10:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Higher-order abstract syntax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:11, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]