A) I think call_some_function() is metasyntactic, not literal. But even if it was... B) I largely agree but I still don't get how people manage without types,

A) I think call_some_function() is metasyntactic, not literal. But even if it was... B) I largely agree but I still don't get how people manage without types, though I get why it occurs. People have different brain styles and hence different programming styles. Personally I dislike dealing with untyped code with "descriptive" names, because it's rarely descriptive enough. I'd take a strong type system with methods like .call(), .string(), .get(), .issue() with an IDE vs overly-descriptive methods like .frob_the_snozzberries() and .squelch_parrots() any day. It's not composable, it's not predictable - wait was it .frob_snozzberries()? There's no symmetry. That style usually accompanies very dynamic code, since if your interface is very specific, .post() only can mean one thing.