News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Tulip – An untyped functional language.

Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by wyager on Friday March 27, 2015 @04:08PM (#9278691)
"I’ve renamed the language from Unf to Tulip, because some folks pointed out that the old name created an unnecessarily sexualized environment"

Are fifth graders critiquing programming languages now? Seriously, who makes that association and then feels the need to comment on it?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by jneen on Friday March 27, 2015 @04:33PM (#9278805)
It was a decision I made, partly because I realized they were right, and partly because I think tulips are pretty.

     ) (
    (  _)
      |/
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by qnaal on Friday March 27, 2015 @09:41PM (#9280116)
unnecessarily sexualized logo

she's doing a high kick away from the viewer?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by jneen on Friday March 27, 2015 @10:33PM (#9280251)
um, it's a flower
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by evincarofautumn on Friday March 27, 2015 @04:30PM (#9278790)
“Unf” is quite widely used as a spelling of a moan, to express sexual desire or gratification. While it can be used to express non-sexual enjoyment, the sexual connotation it evokes is just unnecessary when it comes to a programming language, regardless of the original intent.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by a_c_s on Friday March 27, 2015 @04:40PM (#9278847)
While I've never seen this use personally, UrbanDictionary very strongly corroborates this.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=unf

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by evincarofautumn on Friday March 27, 2015 @04:41PM (#9278859)
It’s worth noting that “universal noise of fucking” is a backronym—the word was originally onomatopoeic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by TazeTSchnitzel on Friday March 27, 2015 @07:16PM (#9279673)
It is, still, but urbandictionary users like making inaccurate definitions as an attempt at "humour"
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by david-given on Friday March 27, 2015 @06:05PM (#9279339)
As an counter datapoint, this is the first time I have ever heard of this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by TazeTSchnitzel on Friday March 27, 2015 @07:17PM (#9279676)
Perhaps as "umph" or "umf"? No?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by david-given on Friday March 27, 2015 @08:02PM (#9279836)
No, not even slightly.

FWIW, I grew up in Scotland, then moved to England, so I'm probably from a rather different cultural background than the poster.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tulip – An untyped functional language by iagooar on Saturday March 28, 2015 @06:11AM (#9280957)
As a non-native speaker, I have seen "umph" before.
[ Parent | on HN ]