So, algebra of programming.

So, like most of our event titles, it's a bit of a

label-swirl.

I can also write a subtitle.

So, subtitle categories for computer scientists.

What is meant by that?

So, we didn't come up with the title algebra of programming or algebra of programming.

That leads us to the literature list, where the two entries, proud two entries in the literature list,

match exactly on title and subtitle of the event.

There is once by Bert and Demore, or Demore, or I don't know if he is British, no, he will

be Dutch, so I'll take Demore.

A book called algebra of programming.

And that is meant to a stronger extent, especially as this event is really meant to be.

That means, categorical theory is used to build up an algebraic theory of programs

and then to create a program transformation calculation with a purely equation transformation.

To make transformational developments, to give correctness proofs and so on.

We do that partly, but that is not our only focus here.

It is also in the center of the interest, but it is not the only thing we do in contrast

to the book.

It is a well-developed area.

It is, from its overall perspective, a bit idiosyncratic to programming.

But there is a whole community in functional programming that does it in this way.

They throw words around themselves, like kata-morphism, anamorphism,

and who have written the whole vocabulary of this book.

We are also looking at something like that, but it is not the only thing we do.

Done.

Then there is a book by Adamic, Herlich and Strecker, a book on categorical theory.

It has computer parts and does a bit of something about automating theory and stuff.

But it is also a book on categorical theory.

It has two big advantages.

First, it is very readable.

The guys really put in a lot of effort to make sure that this thing can be digested.

If it is about the exercises, where a star is written, it will stop.

Nobody needs to start here.

But the text is really readable, especially in the sense that it is not trivial

for things that are not really trivial in the end.

They really do it in a disciplined way from start to finish.

It is a highly readable book, unlike some other things in this field.

It is also a recommendation, but only for the very hard.

Then there is a book by one of the two inventors of categorical theory,

Sonos McLean, the classic of categories for the working mathematician.

This for the working mathematician is a tip against another famous categorical

against William LaVere, who came to me from the Maoist corner when the book was out.

He wanted to fight for the side of the worker.

McLean is talking about the working mathematician.

This is a book for the hard.

Whoever wants to look into it, should do it.

But he should not be frustrated when it starts to get very slow after the second chapter.

There are several books that are categorized for computer scientists.

They are all quite good.