<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/25/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Philippa Cowderoy</b> <<a href="mailto:flippa@flippac.org">flippa@flippac.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Seth Gordon wrote:<br><br>> Are Benjamin C. Pierce's _Types and Programming Languages_ and/or _Basic<br>> Category Theory for Computer Scientists_ suitable for self-study?<br>><br><br>Basic Category Theory depends on your mindset somewhat. TaPL is great
<br>though, and frequently recommended. The follow-up is also good.</blockquote><div><br>Basic Category Theory is cute, but I think the exercises are sometimes phrased strangely. In some ways, the book makes more sense if you've already seen these ideas once & are trying to get a more CS perspective of the math. I'll probably be alone in this, but I think Mac Lane is a fantastic book for learning category theory. It's hard, but if you trudge along and do the exercises you learn quite a bit. It's fun!
<br></div></div><br>