Hacker News Reader

Comment by tel | Hacker News Reader

For comparison, here's the same thing in Haskell

    f = \x -> \y -> x + y
    g = f 6

with the added bonus of automatic documentation

    ghci> :t f
    f :: Integer -> Integer -> Integer
    ghci> :t g
    g :: Integer -> Integer
    ghci> :t uncurry f
    uncurry f :: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer

View on HN

You don't actually need the second lambda since all Haskell functions take one argument, so you can just do

  f = \x y -> x + y

and you'll have an implicit lambda before the y.

And of course it has operator segmenting so you can just write

    f = (+)

Or simply:

  f x y = x + y

Yes, but that has an obvious lack of syntactic parallelism, one especially important when talking about currying since you might be tempted to relate that to the coffee script

    (X, y) -> x+y

It also has a subtly different performance characteristic in GHC, it turns out. Same semantics though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com