As noted in the article:

> This feature does have some limitations, for instance when we have multiple nested function calls, but in those cases an explicit lambda expression is always still possible.

I've also complained about that a while ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35707689

---

The solution is to delimit the level of expression the underscore (or dollar sign suggested in the article) belongs to. In Kotlin they use braces and `it`.

    { add(it, 3) } // Kotiln
    add(_, 3) // Scala

Then modifying the "hole in the expression" is easy. Suppose we want to subtract the first argument by 2 before passing that to `add`:

    { add(subtract(it, 2), 3) } // Kotlin
    // add(subtract(_, 2), 3) // no, this means adding 3 to the function `add(subtract(_, 2)`
    x => { add(subtract(x, 2), 3) } // Scala

▲ titzer 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think I like the explicit lambda better; I prefer to be judicious with syntactic sugar and special variable names.

    fun x => add(subtract(x, 2), 3) // Virgil

	▲	ackfoobar 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Coming from Scala to Kotlin, this is what I thought as well. Seeing `it` felt very wrong, then I got used to it.