Chad Scherrer wrote:
On 5/23/07, Philippa Cowderoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
Philippa's version is still an instance of partial application; no one said that
the function must be a variable, an arbitrary expression is fine. 2 is being
partially applied to flip (^) so defining sq makes no sense. Also there are no
curried functions and no partial applications anywhere in your code.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
