# constants and functions without arguments

**Lennart Augustsson
**
lennart@mail.augustsson.net

*Fri, 30 Mar 2001 07:18:44 -0500*

Andreas Leitner wrote:
>* Hi,
*>*
*>* I hope this is the right forum to post my question to.
*>*
*>* Given a lazy pure functional language do we need to differntiate (in
*>* syntax) between constants and functions without agruments? And if we
*>* don't need to, does Haskell make a difference?
*
From a pedantic point of view your question makes no sense. The definition
of a function is something that takes an argument and transforms it to a
result. So a function always has exactly one argument. Period.
But from a practical point of view, yes you can regard constants as functions
with no arguments. And it makes sense from a syntactic point of view:
f0 = e0
f1 x = e1
f2 x y = e2
f3 x y z = e3
...
-- Lennart