[Haskell-cafe] Good name for this operator?

[Luke Palmer]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Ariel J. Birnbaum <valgarv at gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> When working with Applicative, I often find myself defining and using
> this operator:
>
> (<%>) :: (Applicative f) => f (a -> b) -> a -> f b
> f <%> x = f <*> pure x

Yeah, me too.

The syntax chosen for applicative does not encode all the information
about the lifting of each side.  For example, as far as I can tell,
<$> is appropriate for both this and for fmap.  So I think <%> is a
fine name  (I often use % as the application operator when I'm
encoding lambda calculus).

Luke