Re: [Haskell-cafe] Real World Haskell: confusion

No, it means exactly what you said it means. People abuse it to mean the second sense. Those people are wrong and there is already a term for that second sense, namely "partial application." I really wish people would stop conflating these terms*, all it does is create confusion. To Eugene: The suggested meaning of "curriable", namely "able to be curried," does not make sense. curry takes an uncurried function to a curried form. * A related annoyance is people who talk about languages "supporting currying and/or partial application." Unless one means that the language supports higher order functions at all by that, it doesn't make any sense. Haskell has no "support" for currying or partial application. The fact that most functions are in curried form in Haskell is merely a convention (with, admittedly strong -social- ramifications.) The only way one could say Haskell "supports" currying is that it has a lightweight notation for nested lambdas. On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 17:17 +0100, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:

Ah. That explains my confusion. But isn't that ambiguous terminology? There must be some reason for it to be that way?

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: The term 'currying' means both of these things: - Converting an uncurried function to a 'curriable' one - Partially applying a 'curriable' function

2009/1/13 Peter Verswyvelen :

> On page 102: "partial function application is named currying" > > > > I thought "currying" or "to curry" means converting > > > > f :: (a,b) ->c > > > > into > > > > g :: a -> b -> c > > > > by applying "curry" (mmm, are Asian people good at Haskell? :-) > > > g = curry f > > > > > > > >

> _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > >

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe