News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types. Parent comment

Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by throwaway999666 on Friday July 10, 2015 @06:58AM (#9863207)
The language and ideas behind it seems pretty serious. But they might consider pissing off particularly prudish Americans to be a bonus.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by justinpombrio on Friday July 10, 2015 @09:22AM (#9863756)
A few timid speakers will mispronounce it like "coke", but everyone knows they're saying it wrong.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by eli_gottlieb on Friday July 10, 2015 @10:01AM (#9863975)
It's pronounced identically to "caulk", though, not "cock".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by Afton on Friday July 10, 2015 @12:30PM (#9864954)
In my idiolect, those two words are homonyms. When I worked construction, you couldn't ask someone for caulk without raucous laughter.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/caulk

this link seems to agree, with the word represented in IPA as [kɔːk]

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by davidgrenier on Friday July 10, 2015 @12:21PM (#9864874)
Not 100% confident on how people pronounce "cock" but it's definitely not close to "caulk".

Being a french speaker, I would say pronunciation is closer to "puck" with a k, so go with "Kuck".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by davidgay on Friday July 10, 2015 @10:18AM (#9864060)
More like somewhere in between, really.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by innguest on Friday July 10, 2015 @02:09PM (#9865663)
More information about who in the US has and hasn't merged those two sounds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_Englis...

It's the cot-caught merger.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by cjensen on Friday July 10, 2015 @12:43PM (#9865055)
Intentionally pissing off people is childish.

Using the name of this language in a workplace creates a hostile working environment[1]. That guarantees that no sensible person in the English speaking world will ever use the language at work.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_work_environment

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Coq: Certified Programming with Dependent Types by throwaway999666 on Friday July 10, 2015 @03:00PM (#9866037)
> Using the name of this language in a workplace creates a hostile working environment[1].

Oh my, thanks for the laugh. I half imagined a Dilbert scenario when reading that.

It's weird to think of the simultaneous uptightness and childishness which would make it impossible to use this homonym in the proper context.

[ Parent | on HN ]