3 ms·I assume `with :: forall m a. m a -> m a; with = id` - is that defined somewhere?by dllthomas 9y agoI assume `with :: forall m a. m a -> m a; with = id` - is that defined somewhere?tome 9y agoNo, I just made it up but if enough people shared the OP's feelings it would be defined somewhere. The fact that it doesn't exist is evidence that it's not needed.dllthomas 9y agoA fair point, but weakened somewhat by the fact that type applications are as new as they are.