I'm thinking of how you could write in point-free style or even have a `(.)` function to begin with if you had the Smalltalk "message passing" style.
Sure the Haskell syntax is a bit much when you're not familiar with it but, like almost any language, it's often the least-interesting part of the language and the most talked about.
A lot of functional languages -- Haskell as I understand it is the biggest perpetrator -- optimize for code length and composability, trying to make things as expressive as possible, and decrying those who can't read something that has meaning densely packed into every single character as those who are "simply not familiar" with the language.
But that's what OP is saying: OO languages go for readability and not expressiveness, and wouldn't it be cool if there was an FP language that did the same thing?
I'm curious if Keli plans to maintain function composition in the face of named arguments. It would be quite nice to have both.
Moreover, I believe that in general, shorter code is more readable code. People just like to make excuses in order to avoid learning anything new.
let q = (f .y g)(z=a) then q(y=b) = f(x=g(z=a), y=b)
let q = (f .x g)(z=a) then q(z=a) = f(y=g(z=a), x=b)
Aesthetically it would be kinda like the notation for fiber product.