Curried functions

Isiah Meadows isiahmeadows at
Fri Oct 16 19:31:24 UTC 2015

The main reason I don't use it is because I have bad experiences with
transparent currying in dynamic languages. It'll be one of those things I
almost never have the use case for. Kinda like SIMD and Math.imul. YMMV

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015, 15:27 Jeremy Darling <jeremy.darling at> wrote:

> Maybe it belongs on the Function prototype, something like
> Function.prototype.curry.  To me, having Curry built into the language
> would be beneficial especially with the large push that is being seen
> toward Functional development in JavaScript.
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Yongxu Ren <renyongxu at> wrote:
>> Michał, thanks for pointing that out. Yes, optional options as the last
>> optional parameter does exist, in multiple libraries. But I is there really
>> existed any library that using arrow function like this? I doubt it.
>> I think arrow function should only be used for lambda expression,
>> callback and short in block function. It does cause incompatibility if
>> anyone used arrow function for API interface, but doing that is
>> anti-pattern.
>> Curry function are often used in iterations, a slow polyfill will defeat
>> the purpose.
>> Considering this case:
>> ```
>> map (add 1) [1..100000]
>> ```
>> I think native syntax support for curry will be a good thing, it can be
>> used for JIT.
>> However, javascript already too big, so why not just let existing syntax
>> to do the work?
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list