yes, i found the first example quite surprising. there doesn't seem to be any request to copy the string; it is simply unintuively copied/produced three times. i would prefer the language have some kind of `dup` or something, which gives you an additional reference to the object.

as it stands, it has transferred allocation from the runtime to the compiler. but the objective is to put it into the hands of the developer, since only then is it known when reading and writing code.

i begin to suspect that a typed joy may be more practical (or rather: match my desired improvements) than clarifying allocations in haskell.