I’m quite comfortable with laziness as is in the language, there’s just one thing I find missing: an ability to guarantee that any given value is correctly evaluated. A good example of a bad way to do this is deepseq: `rnf` always traverses the entire data structure and gives no feedback on whether it evaluated anything. In an application that correctly evaluates data this function is a complete waste of time. Moving this functionality to a debug build can be done with an assert, so that’s easy. The question that remains then is how to check whether a data structure is evaluated. Per the `nothunks` library, the answer (here) seems to be using GHC.Exts.Heap.getBoxedClosureData to get a copy of an internal representation and analyzing that. This looks ad-hoc and I imagine is also relatively slow with all the repackaging. So why isn’t there `isWHNF :: a -> IO Bool` function in GHC internals that copies what `seq` does without forcing the thunk (similar relationship to one between tryReadMVar and `readMVar`)?

I’m quite comfortable with laziness as is in the language, there’s just one thing I find missing: an ability to guarantee that any given value is correctly evaluated. A good example of a bad way to do this is deepseq: `rnf` always traverses the entire data structure and gives no feedback on whether it evaluated anything. In an application that correctly evaluates data this function is a complete waste of time. Moving this functionality to a debug build can be done with an assert, so that’s easy. The question that remains then is how to check whether a data structure is evaluated. Per the `nothunks` library, the answer (here) seems to be using GHC.Exts.Heap.getBoxedClosureData to get a copy of an internal representation and analyzing that. This looks ad-hoc and I imagine is also relatively slow with all the repackaging. So why isn’t there `isWHNF :: a -> IO Bool` function in GHC internals that copies what `seq` does without forcing the thunk (similar relationship to one between tryReadMVar and `readMVar`)?

I’m quite comfortable with laziness as is in the language, there’s just one thing I find missing: an ability to guarantee that any given value is correctly evaluated. A good example of a bad way to do this is deepseq: `rnf` always traverses the entire data structure and gives no feedback on whether it evaluated anything. In an application that correctly evaluates data this function is a complete waste of time. Moving this functionality to a debug build can be done with an assert, so that’s easy. The question that remains then is how to check whether a data structure is evaluated. Per the `nothunks` library, the answer (here) seems to be using GHC.Exts.Heap.getBoxedClosureData to get a copy of an internal representation and analyzing that. This looks ad-hoc and I imagine is also relatively slow with all the repackaging. So why isn’t there `isWHNF :: a -> IO Bool` function in GHC internals that copies what `seq` does without forcing the thunk (similar relationship to one between tryReadMVar and `readMVar`)?

I’m quite comfortable with laziness as is in the language, there’s just one thing I find missing: an ability to guarantee that any given value is correctly evaluated. A good example of a bad way to do this is deepseq: `rnf` always traverses the entire data structure and gives no feedback on whether it evaluated anything. In an application that correctly evaluates data this function is a complete waste of time. Moving this functionality to a debug build can be done with an assert, so that’s easy. The question that remains then is how to check whether a data structure is evaluated. Per the `nothunks` library, the answer (here) seems to be using GHC.Exts.Heap.getBoxedClosureData to get a copy of an internal representation and analyzing that. This looks ad-hoc and I imagine is also relatively slow with all the repackaging. So why isn’t there `isWHNF :: a -> IO Bool` function in GHC internals that copies what `seq` does without forcing the thunk (similar relationship to one between tryReadMVar and `readMVar`)?

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

I think `crypton` makes very little direct use of `basement`, namely (distributed between four modules): import Basement.Block (Block, freeze, unsafeFreeze) import Basement.Block.Mutable ( MutableBlock, copyFromPtr, mutableLengthBytes, new, newPinned, unsafeFreeze , unsafeWrite, withMutablePtr ) import Basement.Monad (MonadFailure (..), PrimState) import Basement.NormalForm (deepseq) import Basement.Types.OffsetSize (CountOf (..), Offset (..))

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

I think `crypton` makes very little direct use of `basement`, namely (distributed between four modules): import Basement.Block (Block, freeze, unsafeFreeze) import Basement.Block.Mutable ( MutableBlock, copyFromPtr, mutableLengthBytes, new, newPinned, unsafeFreeze , unsafeWrite, withMutablePtr ) import Basement.Monad (MonadFailure (..), PrimState) import Basement.NormalForm (deepseq) import Basement.Types.OffsetSize (CountOf (..), Offset (..))

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

I think `crypton` makes very little direct use of `basement`, namely (distributed between four modules): import Basement.Block (Block, freeze, unsafeFreeze) import Basement.Block.Mutable ( MutableBlock, copyFromPtr, mutableLengthBytes, new, newPinned, unsafeFreeze , unsafeWrite, withMutablePtr ) import Basement.Monad (MonadFailure (..), PrimState) import Basement.NormalForm (deepseq) import Basement.Types.OffsetSize (CountOf (..), Offset (..))

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

I think `crypton` makes very little direct use of `basement`, namely (distributed between four modules): import Basement.Block (Block, freeze, unsafeFreeze) import Basement.Block.Mutable ( MutableBlock, copyFromPtr, mutableLengthBytes, new, newPinned, unsafeFreeze , unsafeWrite, withMutablePtr ) import Basement.Monad (MonadFailure (..), PrimState) import Basement.NormalForm (deepseq) import Basement.Types.OffsetSize (CountOf (..), Offset (..))

do you actually want a re-design of memory, or just a drop in replacement with the basement parts ripped out? I’ve been experimenting on crypton and was able to just replace all basement parts with existing stuff in base or other packages such as base16 or deepseq

<ul> <li>with attribution , see <a href="https://hackage-content.haskell.org/package/golds-gym-0.4.0.0/docs/src/Test.Hspec.BenchGolden.Runner.html" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://hackage-content.haskell.org/package/golds-gym-0.4.0.0/docs/src/Test.Hspec.BenchGolden.Runner.html</a> . I did so not to incur into a dependency on <code>tasty</code>. Indeed the code I vendored in only depends on <code>deepseq</code> so ideally should be imported from there.</li> </ul>

ArXiv link for DeepSeq: High-Throughput Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Data Labeling via Web Search-Augmented Agentic Generative AI Foundation Models