 |
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. |
|
 Stub |
This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Low |
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[edit] Metamorphism
So, as the article is currently written the definition of a hylomorphism is self-dual... it doesn't make sense to say that a "metamorphism" is the dual concept. The definition given for a metamorphism IS NOT dual to the definition given for a hylomorphism; think about it.--128.208.1.234 (talk) 18:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Can you clarify, or improve the article yourself? It seems okay to me: Dual (category theory) claims that the dual can be formed by switching domains and codomains and reversing compositions. Do this with a hylomorphism, and you get a metamorphism. No? Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 21:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
It's no wonder that no one actually uses these languages. Maybe you can complicate the issue some more, try introducing Faserbündel and Kohomologie. --88.74.143.39 (talk) 11:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
It's hard to believe there's a name for something like this. What's the "usefulness" tipping point between categorizing algorithms and coding them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kp1197 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
