Currying and Treating Instance Methods as Curried Functions


Currying is a very useful and interesting thing. It means that you can write functions in parts. If you don’t provide all parts at once, you won’t get the “real” result but a closure that accepts the missing parameters.

Like this, with spacing added to reveal how the nested closure maps to the chain of return types:

func add(a: Int) -> (Int)    -> Int {
    return {        (b: Int) -> Int in
        return a + b

print(add(31)(13)) // => 44

So you can break the parameter list up and call the result of the first function call again. This is useful for storing partial applications:

let add5 = add(5)
print(add5(10))    // => 15
print(add5(20))    // => 25

This is turn can be useful to provide context for setting up a block to be called later. You provide the parameters you know in advance and leave some out to be called later.

class Server {
    func fetchData(completion: (data: NSData?) -> Void) {

This method expects a block or function of type NSData -> Void. Here’s a curried function that does not fit unless you provide the first set of parameters:

func showDataInViewController(viewController: ServerDataViewController) -> (NSData?) -> Void {
    return { data in 
        // This closure captures `viewController`, too.
        guard let data = data else { return }

Now I here’s a contrived example to show how you can vary one part of that function call while leaving the other unspecified

if someInitialCondition {    
} else {

You see:

  • showDataInViewController(foo) is of type (NSData) -> Void, while
  • showDataInViewController is of type (ServerDataViewController) -> (NSData?) -> Void.

If all this is super new to you: you can reference any function or method instead of calling it, like so:

// Reference print(...)
let logger = print

// Use the reference later
logger("hi")   // => hi

Now to the fun part which I haven’t used until today: you can do the same with methods when you don’t know the object, yet.

Sticking to the example from above:

class Server {
    func fetchData(completion: (data: NSData?) -> Void) { /* ... */ }

let fetchDataFromServer = Server.fetchData

When you have an object, the following calls will produce the same result:

let aServer = Server()
fetchDataFromServer(aServer) { data in
    // ...
aServer.fetchData() { data in
    // ...

You’ll see:

  • fetchDataFromServer is of type (Server) -> ((NSData?) -> Void) -> Void, while
  • server.fetchData is of type ((NSData?) -> Void) -> Void.

This looks just like what we tried with currying from above. Even though this might not even be the same mechanism, from a pragmatic point of view calling ClassName.methodName does the same to the method like creating a curried static variant of it.

Real-world example

I used it to produce function pointers instead of delegating directly. Say I have over-specified my methods somewhere, like so:

extension Coordinates {
    func moveUp() -> Coordinates {
        // y - 1

    func moveDown() -> Coordinates {
        // y + 1

    func moveLeft() -> Coordinates {
        // y - 1

    func moveRight() -> Coordinates {
        // y + 1

These explicit methods are a pain: they over-specify the changes that are possible by defining methods for each of the directions. I’d prefer to type the directions instead to make the interface cleaner:

enum Direction {
    case Up
    case Down
    case Left
    case Right

To leverage the existing code before refactoring, I found a switch helpful that doesn’t delegate from Direction back to Coordinates, at least not directly:

extension Direction {
    var offsetCoordinates: (Coordinates) -> () -> Coordinates {
        switch self {
        case Up: return Coordinates.declinedRow
        case Down: return Coordinates.advancedRow
        case Left: return Coordinates.declinedColumn
        case Right: return Coordinates.advancedRow

extension Coordinates {
    func offsetIn(direction: Direction) -> Coordinates {
        return direction.offsetCoordinates(self)()

offsetCoordinates produces references to the overly explicit methods of Coordinates. Instead of requiring a reference to a coordinate object, the property doesn’t need anything at all. The resulting closure will require a coordinate to pull the method down to the instance level again:


The result itself is a reference to one of the “move” methods and needs to be executed as well:

//                               ^^

Now I don’t know when you’re going to need stuff like this, but if you do, don’t be afraid to try it out.

In this particular case the intermediate solution was “clever” but inferior to defining a new move(direction: Direction) method with a new kind of Direction that can apply itself:

struct Direction {
    static let Up    = Direction( 0, -1)
    static let Down  = Direction( 0,  1)
    static let Left  = Direction(-1,  0)
    static let Right = Direction( 1,  0)
    let offsetX: Int
    let offsetY: Int
    init(_ offsetX: Int, _ offsetY: Int) {
        self.offsetX = offsetX
        self.offsetY = offsetY

Receive new .