Re: Different higher-order func notation? (was Re: RFC 23 (v1) Higher order functions)

[Nathan Wiger]

> I'd agree to the contrapositive: if we have named placeholders, I don't see the
> need for positional ones too.  But I'm willing to be convinced.  The below, with
> positional only, is total gibberish, as Ken points out.

To most, probably, but I say let the user decide. Like Jeremy points
out:

There's a nice parallel with '$' as used for:
- $identifier: named variable
- $_: anonymous/default variable
- $digit ...: positional variable from last exp

With ^ used in the same way, we're giving them the same power with
higher-order functions. TMTOWTDI! :-)

-Nate