Currying：实际意义(Currying: practical implications)

 我对这个问题的理解来自Heilperin等人。 “混凝土抽象” 。 我得到的结论是对函数的求值的转换，该函数将几个参数用于评估函数序列，每个函数都有一个参数。 我清楚了两种方法之间的语义差异（我可以这样称呼它们吗？）但我确信我没有掌握这两种方法背后的实际意义。 
 
 请考虑在Ocaml中： 
 
# let foo x y = x * y;;
foo : int -> int -> int = <fun>
 
 和 
 
# let foo2 (x, y) = x * y;;
foo2 : int * int -> int = <fun>
 
 两个函数的结果相同。 但是，实际上，这两个功能有什么不同呢？ 可读性？ 计算效率？ 我缺乏经验不能给这个问题足够的阅读。 

My comprehension of the problem comes from Heilperin's et al. "Concrete Abstraction". I got that currying is the translation of the evaluation of a function that takes several arguments into evaluating a sequence of functions, each with a single argument. I have clear the semantic differences between the two approaches (can I call them this way?) but I am sure I did not grasp the practical implications behind the two approaches.
 
Please consider, in Ocaml:
 
# let foo x y = x * y;;
foo : int -> int -> int = <fun>
 
and
 
# let foo2 (x, y) = x * y;;
foo2 : int * int -> int = <fun>
 
The results will be the same for the two functions. But, practically, what does make the two functions different? Readability? Computational efficiency? My lack of experience fails to give to this problem an adequate reading.

原文：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39835395