"Apply's ap; derivable as" mentioned in both Chain and Monad

[rpominov]

Is this intentional? Monad depends on Chain anyway, so it seems redundant.

Also I noticed it says "Apply's ap" not "Applicative's ap", so with Chain or Monad we only get Apply for free, not Applicative?

Just a thought: maybe there should be duplication, but in Monad it should say "Applicative's ap"?

[CrossEye]

I'm not sure what you're saying. ap is defined by the Apply spec. So if ap is derivable, it's "the ap method of Apply" or "Apply's ap" that we would discuss. With Chain, we do not get Applicative for free. (There are non-Applicative Chains, and Applicatives that are not Chains.) With Monad, we must implement both Chain's chain and Applicative's of, but we can derive Apply's ap.

[rpominov]

That makes sense, I came to the similar conclusion after thinking more about it. The only thing that bugs me now is:

Monad depends on Chain anyway, so it seems redundant.

[CrossEye]

Yes, that is a bit redundant.

[rpominov]

Fixed by #134