>>61
I'm
>>60, and I sympathize with your question. It's convention, just so you know what's callable. I'll agree that differentiating an integer from a string (be it iStuff and lpszStuff (Hungarian notation shit) or stuff% and stuff$ (... OR GTFO)) is excessive, and shouldn't be necessary (if you call a "Rofl" method, you expect any object of any class that's stored in the variable should be able to do "Rofl"), but actually executing (even though it can be seen as a method as well, like Python) is "serious business". So I capitalize what's callable (classes, functions, even callable objects in Python), but I sympathize with your intent on treating functions absolutely the same as any other data type (and that code is a particular case of data, not something different).
>>63
You gave me just another reason not to bother with Haskell (besides insane syntax, needlessly complicated, small codebase/community made mostly from el33tist h4xx0rz). I follow my own (
>>60 ) conventions on any language; if I can't, I get pissed.