What about the derived functions in Control.Monad, such as liftM? Shall we similarly relax their constraints to Applicative and consider them &quot;legacy&quot;? (<span></span>Did this already happen when I wasn&#39;t looking?)<br><br>On Thursday, September 24, 2015, John Wiegley &lt;<a href="mailto:johnw@newartisans.com">johnw@newartisans.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Herbert Valerio Riedel &lt;<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, &#39;cvml&#39;, &#39;hvr@gnu.org&#39;)">hvr@gnu.org</a>&gt; writes:<br>
<br>
&gt; TLDR: To complete the AMP, turn `Monad(return)` method into a<br>
&gt;       top-level binding aliasing `Applicative(pure)`.<br>
<br>
Very much +1.<br>
<br>
John<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Libraries mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, &#39;cvml&#39;, &#39;Libraries@haskell.org&#39;)">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
</blockquote><br><br>-- <br>-- Dan Burton<br>