Skip to the content.

← Changelog index


v1.4.10 — Formally cite and define the remaining type-theory notions

Follow-up to the “judgment” fix: audited the whole book for other type-theory notions introduced or used without a formal definition and a citation to a source. Fixed five: definitional/propositional equality and the universe hierarchy (both already had good definitions/examples, just no References section — added citations to Pierce, Martin-Löf, Girard, and TPIL4); the Curry–Howard correspondence (added a citation to Howard’s 1980 paper, newly added to the Bibliography, plus TPIL4); “eliminator”/ “recursor,” used twice with a formal treatment explicitly promised in Chapter 1 §4 but never delivered (added the promised definition and a Nat.rec worked example to Chapter 1 §5, cross-linked from Chapter 3 §5’s Or.elim); and decidability (added a Pierce/TAPL citation).

v1.4.10 — Formally define “judgment” at its first use, with an example

Chapter 1 §1 used the type-theoretic term “judgment” (#check e is the judgment $e : \tau$) without ever formally defining it — the term-first, citation-never treatment that had crept in. Added a short formal definition, cited to Martin-Löf’s Intuitionistic Type Theory, right before the term’s first use, followed immediately by a worked example ($3 : \mathtt{Nat}$) illustrating what the definition means, plus a matching Bibliography entry/reference link.

Try Lean
Lean playground · v1.4.18