←back to thread

Can your terminal do emojis? How big?

(dgl.cx)
178 points dgl | 2 comments | 24 Jun 25 02:13 UTC | HN request time: 0.683s | source
Show context
p4cmanus3r ◴[24 Jun 25 07:10 UTC] No.44363591[source]▶
Back in my day... They didn't have emojis in terminals.
replies(4): >>44363604 #>>44363623 #>>44364114 #>>44364718 #
voidUpdate ◴[24 Jun 25 07:18 UTC] No.44363623[source]▶
When was your day? Emoticons have been used in terminals since 1982
replies(1): >>44363860 #
account42 ◴[24 Jun 25 08:02 UTC] No.44363860[source]▶
Emoticons are not the same as emojis. For one they allow for more expression or personal style by having different variants, e.g. :-) vs :) or for absolute maniacs: (:

They are also not limited to what some consortium and a couple of megacorporations think you should be able to express.

replies(3): >>44364130 #>>44367439 #>>44370944 #
oneeyedpigeon ◴[24 Jun 25 08:52 UTC] No.44364130[source]▶
They also lack semantics. There are downsides as well as up.
replies(3): >>44364181 #>>44364293 #>>44365216 #
1. account42 ◴[24 Jun 25 09:02 UTC] No.44364181[source]▶
Usage rather than specifications determine semantics and due to the points in my previous post those often disagree for Unicode emojis.
replies(1): >>44364284 #
2. oneeyedpigeon ◴[24 Jun 25 09:23 UTC] No.44364284[source]▶
I'm glad you recognise the value of usage when it comes to emoticons vs. emoji...