I'm intrigued that Python has some functional constructions in the language.

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Sat, 09 May 2009 14:57:24 -0300, namekuseijin wrote:

> I'm saying syntax is nothing special.  They are user-defined, as
> functions.  And it all gets converted into functions.  Functions matter,
> syntax is irrelevant because you can do away with it.

How do you call functions without syntax? By mental telepathy? By direct 
manipulation of the electromagnetic fields inside the CPU?


> In Haskell, point free style of programming shows almost no signs of
> predefined syntax at all.  It's all function composition.

But it takes syntax in order to write function composition. There's at 
least six ways of doing function composition:

f(g(x))    # used in many programming languages and mathematics
f . g (x)  # Haskell
f o g (x)  # mathematics
g f        # stack-based languages like Forth
g x | f    # Unix-like shells
compose(f, g)(x)   # possible in many languages.

> In functional programming languages, predefined syntax is mostly
> irrelevant.  In Python and other imperative languages, it's absolutely
> necessary.  That's my point.

I think your point is wrong. Without syntax, there can be no written 
communication. In Haskell, f.g is not the same as f+g -- the difference 
is one of syntax.


-- 
Steven