I don't see the utility in going out of the way to inject extra obfuscatory language just to describe it
It's only obfuscatory if you don't know what the terms mean :-) If you do then the utility is more information on the intent.
If somebody refers to a curried function then I know that they're going to be taking a function and specialising it by freezing one of its arguments. This tells me more than if they had referred to it as a closure.
In reply to Re^6: Specializing Functions with Currying
by adrianh
in thread Specializing Functions with Currying
by FoxtrotUniform
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |