Re: Proposal: add liftA4 and liftA5 to match liftM4 and liftM5

Well, I'm looking to define liftM = liftA, liftM2 = liftA2, liftM3 = liftA3, and (with a modified definition of ap) I'm getting that to work, but that leaves liftM4 and liftM5 hanging. On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:30 PM, John Lato wrote:

Does anyone actually want these? I would have thought we should go the other way and deprecate `liftM3+` in favor of using `<*>`.

On Thu Nov 06 2014 at 10:26:36 AM David Feuer wrote:

...

Since Applicative is supposed to be important now, I figure we should get these in. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries