<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<commit>
  <added type="array"/>
  <modified type="array">
    <modified>
      <diff>@@ -15,4 +15,4 @@ Rather than continuing with the Agda course, I have begun to brush up on fundame
 
 ### Next Up
 
-I'm in the middle of chapter 2 right now, which is on [intuitionistic logic](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic). My plan is to finish this chapter as well as chapters 3 and 4 on the *simply typed lambda-calculus* and the *Curry-Howard Isomorphism* respectively. As I'm reading this I'm taking notes that will be used for a post that clarifies the relationship between axioms, judgments, and implication that I mentioned earlier. In particular, chapter 2's [natural deduction](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_deduction) explanation as a formal version of the [BHK intepretation] of logical connectives in intuitionistic logic includes a simple definition of implication in terms of judgments (in the *introduction* and *elimination* rules). With chapters 1-4 done I think I'll be able to write the aforementioned post and be able to sleep soundly about the explanation. Once again, although I'm already familiar with the topics covered, the level of precision used in LCHI makes it a slow but gratifying read... highly recommended if you have the will-power =)
+I'm in the middle of chapter 2 right now, which is on [intuitionistic logic](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic). My plan is to finish this chapter as well as chapters 3 and 4 on the *simply typed lambda-calculus* and the *Curry-Howard Isomorphism* respectively. As I'm reading this I'm taking notes that will be used for a post that clarifies the relationship between axioms, judgments, and implication that I mentioned earlier. In particular, chapter 2's [natural deduction](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_deduction) explanation as a formal version of the [BHK intepretation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brouwer%E2%80%93Heyting%E2%80%93Kolmogorov_interpretation) of logical connectives in intuitionistic logic includes a simple definition of implication in terms of judgments (in the *introduction* and *elimination* rules). With chapters 1-4 done I think I'll be able to write the aforementioned post and be able to sleep soundly about the explanation. Once again, although I'm already familiar with the topics covered, the level of precision used in LCHI makes it a slow but gratifying read... highly recommended if you have the will-power =)</diff>
      <filename>_posts/2009-11-02-progress-report-and-lchi.markdown</filename>
    </modified>
  </modified>
  <removed type="array"/>
  <parents type="array">
    <parent>
      <id>a1694bbdbdbf1226fb24adf5c82b433a64a9fe56</id>
    </parent>
  </parents>
  <author>
    <name>Larry Diehl</name>
    <email>larrytheliquid@netbooktheliquid.(none)</email>
  </author>
  <url>http://github.com/larrytheliquid/larrytheliquid.github.com/commit/15f1e0b1b61170b434de7b1f7191842387042ce6</url>
  <id>15f1e0b1b61170b434de7b1f7191842387042ce6</id>
  <committed-date>2009-11-03T06:49:43-08:00</committed-date>
  <authored-date>2009-11-03T06:49:43-08:00</authored-date>
  <message>A BHK link</message>
  <tree>1a34cc18b03ed8e4b2bda73073b2c6ab69d8be19</tree>
  <committer>
    <name>Larry Diehl</name>
    <email>larrytheliquid@netbooktheliquid.(none)</email>
  </committer>
</commit>
