[Haskell-cafe] Assignment, Substitution or what?

[Derek Elkins]

On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 01:42 +0100, PR Stanley wrote:
> > > > f x = x + x
> > > > Is the "x" use to create a pattern in the definition and when f is
> > > > called it's replaced by a value?
> > >
> > >Those equation-like definitions are syntactic sugar for lambda
> > >abstractions. f could as well be defined as f = \x -> x + x.
> >
> >Please elaborate
> >
> >
> >First, the
> >
> >f x =
> >
> >part says that f is a function which takes a single parameter, 
> >called x.  The other side of the = sign gives the function body: in 
> >this case, x + x.  This is exactly the same thing that is expressed 
> >by the lambda expression
> >
> >\x -> x + x
> >
> >This expression defines a function that takes a single parameter 
> >called x, and returns the value of x + x.  The only difference is 
> >that with the lambda expression, this function is not given a 
> >name.  But you can easily give the function a name (just as you can 
> >give any Haskell expression a name) by writing
> >
> >f = \x -> x + x
> >
> >In general, writing
> >
> >g x y z = blah blah
> >
> >is just a shorthand for
> >
> >g = \x -> \y -> \z -> blah blah.
> >
> >That is, it simultaneously creates a function expression, and 
> >assigns it a name.
> >
> >Does that help?
> 
> Yes and thanks for the reply.
> When a function is declared in C the argument variable has an address 
> somewhere in the memory:
> int f ( int x ) {
> return x * x;
> }
> 
> any value passed to f() is assigned to x. x is the identifier for a 
> real slot in the memory (the stack most likely) made available for f().
> Is this also what happens in Haskell?

How would you tell?