agda-stdlib VS P2PoW

For further reading, there's a paper on arity generic programming and some solutions using dependent typing in Agda.

In Rust I have never seen it. However, in Agda it's a convention, and the code looks beautifully https://github.com/agda/agda-stdlib/blob/master/src/Algebra/Lattice/Structures.agda

Agda is a good example, as it allows you to define arbitrary Unicode-based operators and names: https://github.com/agda/agda-stdlib/blob/master/src/Data/Product.agda

Most of the times you want the first three arguments to be passed implicitly, not just the first. And the syntax for passing arguments implicitly is the same for the type argument A and the term arguments n and m. (For Agda, see e.g. l.49 here: https://github.com/agda/agda-stdlib/blob/master/src/Data/Star/Vec.agda)

I am learning about nano, and I am a big fan so far. I am trying to wrap my mind around distributed proof of work (DPoW) and similar projects (e.g. P2PoW) and whether they have potential to violate Nano's core principle of being energy efficient (and feeless). I think for this to really be a concern, these services would need to be abused by spam attacks (like the current attack)

That said, PoW doesn't have to be subsidized by third parties forever. Wallets could introduce various kinds of fees to cover their expenses with calculating the PoW on their own servers, for instance. Then you have systems like https://github.com/anarkrypto/P2PoW that seems to incentivize PoW providers more directly (I haven't explored it much yet).