[CrossEye]

Yes, freely admitted. (Author here.)

I feel that although the distinction can be very important, it's much less so for Javascript. And the implementation in Ramda can be used that way any time you choose:

    var total = reduce(add)(0);  // or 
    var sum = reduce(add)(0)(numbers)

works just as well in Ramda as

    var total = reduce(add, 0);  // or
    var sum = reduce(add, 0, numbers)

So, as I said, feel free to keep on insisting. :-)

[cowbell]

http://vimeo.com/96639840

Start at 26mins. You don't have flip. You lose control over partial application. It isn't curry. You're right. It is an important distinction :)

[CrossEye]

I finally got a chance to watch that video, and it looks as though what you're worried about is `flip`. Ramda for one already includes a version that works much like Haskell's. I don't know if this satisfies your objection, though.

[tel]

As I stated above... flip is well defined so long as your arguments are positional.

[comex]

This implementation of multi-argument partial application does not in any say prevent implementation of flip. It's just syntax sugar.