[Haskell-cafe] Currying: The Rationale

[Chad Scherrer]

On 5/23/07, Philippa Cowderoy <flippa at flippac.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2007, Chad Scherrer wrote:
>
> > Is (^2) really considered currying? As I understand it, this is
> > syntactic sugar for a "section", and might confuse the issue a bit,
> > since it's distinct from ((^) 2).
>
> Sure, but it's (flip (^)) 2.

Well, ok, but you've changed the definition. If it were enough for it
to be equivalent to a curried version, we could as well write

sq x = times (x,x) where times (x,y) = x * y

and argue that this is partial application of a curried function
because it's equivalent to the curried version you gave. But I guess
I'm being a bit pedantic here, and I suspect your definition is
exactly how (^2) is desugared.

Chad

>
> --
> flippa at flippac.org
>
> Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire. Most
> of the time you just get burnt worse though.