[Haskell-cafe] Haskell's "currying" versus Business Objects Gem Cutter's "burning"

In Haskell, currying can only be done on the last (rightmost) function arguments. So foo x y can be curried as foo x but not as foo ? y where ? would be a "wilcard" for the x parameter. In Haskell, one must write a new function foo2 y x = foo x y and then one can curry the x parameter like foo2 y In Gem Cutter - which is a visual programming language - on can "burn" any input argument (which is like putting the ? for any argument in the foo function). See http://resources.businessobjects.com/labs/cal/gemcutter-techpaper.pdf This burning looks more general to me, but cannot be done using the textual approach? Does this reasoning make any sense? Thanks, Peter