Although point-free style achieves (or surpasses) the brevity of anaphoric style, it does so in a manifestly different way. To use two Ruby examples, (1..1

Although point-free style achieves (or surpasses) the brevity of anaphoric style, it does so in a manifestly different way. To use two Ruby examples, (1..100).map(&:to_s) (1..100).map(&it.to_s) The first example reads to me as mapping a method over the numbers, while the second reads to me as a very terse way of describing a function that sends a method to each number. I am not doing a good job of explaining the difference in my head, but I do know that sometimes I really like point-free style because I am thinking in operations and methods rather than in functions.