Would (<$$>) be a sensible name? To match (<**>) from Control.Applicative (<$$>) :: Functor f => a -> f (a -> b) -> f b I don't really feel the need for such a function, though. On a related note, the documentation for (<**>) is pretty bad. It says "A variant of <*> with the arguments reversed." but that doesn't make it clear that the function is different from `flip (<*>)`. Twan On 16/02/14 19:51, Dimitri Sabadie wrote:
Hi all,
I often come up using this snippet: map ($ a) l with l :: [a -> b]
In Control.Lens, there’s a nice combinator for that, (??) :
l ?? a
I think it’d be great to include that in Data.Functor, because it’s a very common use case.
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries