In Haskell, all the types form a category named Hask
.
Function types are types.
Do all the function types form a subcategory of Hask
?
Do all the non-function types form a subcategory of Hask
?
I think both answers are yes. But I dont know if I am right.
Let C
be any category having class O
for its objects.
If O'
is any subclass of O
we can define a category C'
taking O'
as the objects, and keeping all the morphisms in C
which still "make sense", i.e. which have source and target object in O'
. Composition and identities are the same (restricted to O'
).
C'
is a subcategory of C
. (A full subcategory, to be precise.)
You should check this claim yourself, by expanding all the definitions.
The examples you mention simply pick some special cases for O'
, so they are subcategories.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With