Proposal: add liftA4 and liftA5 to match liftM4 and liftM5

[David Feuer]

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 <jwlato at gmail.com> 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 <david.feuer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Since Applicative is supposed to be important now, I figure we should get
>> these in.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libraries mailing list
>> Libraries at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20141105/10e47902/attachment.html>