The article starts off with the English problem description, but it seems very clear that wasn't the logical starting point. It was framed in Haskell first and

The article starts off with the English problem description, but it seems very clear that wasn't the logical starting point. It was framed in Haskell first and then worked back to the English. There's nothing wrong with that. But I think it's a bit disingenuous for the author to say he started with the English first. Who would describe cooperative threads that way without having a deep understanding of how they were about to implement them in Haskell?