[callmecosmas]

You don't actually need the second lambda since all Haskell functions take one argument, so you can just do

  f = \x y -> x + y

and you'll have an implicit lambda before the y.

[tel]

Yes, but that has an obvious lack of syntactic parallelism, one especially important when talking about currying since you might be tempted to relate that to the coffee script

    (X, y) -> x+y

It also has a subtly different performance characteristic in GHC, it turns out. Same semantics though.

[alipang]

And of course it has operator segmenting so you can just write

    f = (+)

[Peaker]

Or simply:

  f x y = x + y