JavaScript: I've finally found a use case for currying in JavaScript!

currying-use-case.js

// You can have multiple optional arguments, but only if the arguments
// can be distinguished from one another (in this example, by type)

function optionalUnambiguous(myString, myNumber) {
  if (typeof myString === 'number') {
    myNumber = myString;
    myString = null;
  }
  if (myString == null) { myString = 'default'; }
  if (myNumber == null) { myNumber = 0; }
  return [myString, myNumber];
}

optionalUnambiguous()            // ["default", 0]
optionalUnambiguous('test')      // ["test", 0]
optionalUnambiguous(123)         // ["default", 123]
optionalUnambiguous('test', 123) // ["test", 123]


// What happens when you can't distinguish between the optional arguments?
// You run into problems!

function optionalAmbiguous(myValue1, myValue2) {
  if (arguments.length === 1) {
    // which value did they pass in: myValue1 or myValue2?
  }
}


// Instead of a single function with multiple optional arguments, why not
// specify a series of functions that each accept a single argument? This
// way there's no possible ambiguity.
//
// I guess I've finally found a use case for currying in JavaScript!
// http://benalman.com/news/2012/09/partial-application-in-javascript/

function optionalWhatever(myValue1) {
  if (myValue1 == null) { myValue1 = 'default1'; }
  return function(myValue2) {
    if (myValue2 == null) { myValue2 = 'default2'; }
    return [myValue1, myValue2];
  }
}

optionalWhatever()()          // ["default1", "default2"]
optionalWhatever('test')()    // ["test", "default2"]
optionalWhatever()(123)       // ["default1", 123]
optionalWhatever('test')(123) // ["test", 123]

Since the order of the arguments still matter in this example

optionalWhatever()()          // ["default1", "default2"]
optionalWhatever('test')()    // ["test", "default2"]
optionalWhatever()(123)       // ["default1", 123]
optionalWhatever('test')(123) // ["test", 123]

I don't quite see how it's that much better than optionalWhatever(null, "test"), etc.
or am I missing something?