[racket] stream-cons from racket/stream isn't lazy

On Mar 5, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Eugene Toder wrote:

> I though that the whole point of streams was to provide lazy lists in
> a strict language.


I understand. 

I am interested in the following question: does it make sense to 
write parts of a systems in Lazy (so that you have lists=streams
and you naturally stay in this world) and yet by linking to the 
strict world, you still get the best of both. 

-- Matthias