←back to thread

Can your terminal do emojis? How big?

(dgl.cx)
178 points dgl | 1 comments | 24 Jun 25 02:13 UTC | HN request time: 0.351s | source
Show context
sebtron ◴[24 Jun 25 06:52 UTC] No.44363495[source]▶
Am I the only one who actually dislikes the recent trend of putting emojis everywhere in CLI tools? I am ok with red and yellow text for errors and warning, and I can stand green for success (though I find it useless), but emoji's are just distracting.
replies(13): >>44363506 #>>44363532 #>>44363533 #>>44363619 #>>44363620 #>>44363654 #>>44363703 #>>44363709 #>>44363754 #>>44363780 #>>44363895 #>>44364011 #>>44364721 #
bigstrat2003 ◴[24 Jun 25 07:30 UTC] No.44363709[source]▶
Emojis do not belong in the CLI, ever. Hell, I personally think they shouldn't be in Unicode at all (as they are not text), but that ship has long since sailed unfortunately.
replies(2): >>44363875 #>>44363912 #
account42 ◴[24 Jun 25 08:05 UTC] No.44363875[source]▶
The argument for emojis in Unicode was that existing chat protocols had them. But I don't buy that argument since many chat protocols also supported custom smileys which Unicode doesn't. Trying to standardize creative expression is a mistake IMO.
replies(2): >>44364770 #>>44365293 #
1. layer8 ◴[24 Jun 25 12:12 UTC] No.44365293[source]▶
No, the argument was that existing character sets used in Japanese feature phones had them. Because Japanese characters are wider than Western characters, those platforms could be more creative with pictographic characters as well, and could easily add color due to the proprietary phone OS. Unicode added them because Unicode's goal is to provide round-trip compatability with existing character sets.

https://blog.emojipedia.org/correcting-the-record-on-the-fir...