Note that, according to definition of 'function' most common in math, this is false. A function need not even be implementable.
Aside: As someone trained in math I've always found explanations of type theory "fractally confusing" because of stuff like this: type theorists' words mean something different from my words, and in the explanation of what they do mean, they use words that also mean something different.
> Note that, according to definition of 'function' most common in math, this is false.
The standard definition of function in ZFC is a set of tuples pairing every "input" with an "output", so I think the previous commenter was correct with this reading.
> A function need not even be implementable.
However, if you are alluding to computable functions, then certainly, the story is a lot more interesting!