BTW the people on #haskell are quite active, and nice :)
(maybe a pointless counter-example, I once went onto #ruby, and asked about an easy way to make a function name refer to a function( to be able to do things like list map f easily, without the superflous do |x| f x end ), and I got yelled at because I was trying to write "non-ruby code".
To answer your question, because methods aren't first-class in Ruby, you can't pass them around the way you want to. I've decided I don't want my languages telling me what I can or can't do when I know what I want to do is a simple matter of making more types of pointers first-class.
def call_on_two fn
fn.call 2
end
call_on_two 1.method(:+) #=> 3
A method like that could be easily enough created, though it'd be kind of ugly:
module Enumerable
def map_fn fn
map { |i| method(fn).call i }
end
end
def foo num
num + 2
end
[1, 2, 3].map_fn :foo #=> [3, 4, 5]
Which doesn't mean a thing. How many of them are employed developers working in the language, as opposed to dabblers?
Very few professional developers I've known hang on IRC. It's 2014 already.