I Wasn't Joking about One-Argument Haskell Functions
For everyone who read my A Taste of Haskell, A Taste of C, and whose eyes glazed over when I told Nat that Haskell functions only take one argument, John Goerzen explained what I meant in Haskell manipulates functions with the same ease that Perl manipulates strings..
If you watched A Taste of Haskell - Part I, Simon Peyton-Jones answers my question about parenthesizing expressions about halfway through; that's when I was trying to explain this feature to Nat and made his brain hurt. (I realized halfway through SPJ's answer that I had forgotten about associativity.)
If none of this makes sense to you and it still all sounds somehow cool (and once you get past the syntax and avoid some of the math, it's seriously cool), check out Adam Turoff's Why Haskell?, Pure Functions in Haskell, and Monads, for a great introduction to the language for LAMP programmers.
You could do a lot worse than to grab a lazy Saturday afternoon and work through the code. It'll expand your mind in very good ways.
Wow, chromatic warming up to Haskell? What is the world coming to?
|@Aristotle, start to worry if I ever say that I like Haskell's syntax.|