These comments seem to be redefining words each time they are used. A parent comment refers to "value-level code" in Haskell and now this comment says that "nothing is a value in Haskell". This seems to be contradictory.
It's hard to come to any other conclusion here—other than the conclusion that the author of these comments wishes to argue rather than discuss.
There's a lot to learn from the Haskell community if you're willing. For example, there's probably about two decades of work that's been done past the definition of lazy streams which you provide. Conduit, iteratee, pipes, etc. Really cool stuff with stream fusion rules and bounded resource usage.
It's hard to come to any other conclusion here—other than the conclusion that the author of these comments wishes to argue rather than discuss.
There's a lot to learn from the Haskell community if you're willing. For example, there's probably about two decades of work that's been done past the definition of lazy streams which you provide. Conduit, iteratee, pipes, etc. Really cool stuff with stream fusion rules and bounded resource usage.