The notation is presented somewhat confusingly; this definition given for +: \x. \y. (\s. \z. x s (y s z)) Isn't different from \x. \y. \s. \z. x s (y s

The notation is presented somewhat confusingly; this definition given for +: \x. \y. (\s. \z. x s (y s z)) Isn't different from \x. \y. \s. \z. x s (y s z) And usually syntax sugar is assumed such that you can just say: \xysz.xs(ysz) Which is much easier to read. Personally, I find the textual, symbolic representation much easier to reason about; my eyes just glaze over the circuit diagrams.