Should an expression evaluating to a function count as a function for the purpose of providing a solution when a function is asked for? An earlier question on meta seems to indicate a consensus that it is fine to provide a function literal when "a function" is asked for.
Many languages treat functions as first-class citizen, and allow operations on functions such as composition or binding variables. What I wonder is if such expressions that evaluate to a function should be acceptable as an answer.
To illustrate the difference, below is an example of an explicit and a point-free function in Haskell, both yielding the same result.
\xs -> map succ xs -- explicit ("function literal") map succ -- point-free (partial application due to currying) -- both behave the same (\xs -> map succ xs) [1,2,3] -- evaluates to [2,3,4] (map succ) [1,2,3] -- evaluates to [2,3,4]
This seems sufficiently different than the linked question to deserve one on its own. So, what do you think?