[bethekind]

> ...as much as it is for anyone....

The phrasing in this sentence implies that the Julia language could be named for the code breaker, as much as it could be named for anyone else. In other words, it wasn't named for the code breaker, but it might as well have been.

The follow up comment gives hard quantitative fact that the language wasn't named for anyone or anything. I can see how both comments are correct, the first implicitly, the second explicitly

[setr]

The first comment is, at best, pointing out a name collision. It's otherwise fairly meaningless yet misleading. Julia could be named for any Julia in the known universe... but it wasn't.