4 ms·

I think it's a tongue in cheek project that isn't meant to be used in any production system. I'm pretty sure you can already put emojis in the text fields of p

• Ancapistani 6y ago
  > I think it's a tongue in cheek project That would certainly make more sense than anything I’ve been able to glean from it. I’ve definitely used Postgres text columns to store user-provided text values that included emoji in the past. They’re part of my standard test case for any user input.
• JoelJacobson 6y ago
  The idea is to encode binary strings in a visually shorter form than e.g. hex, and also make it easier to visually detect differences. It’s also possibly easier to remember a bunch of emojis than a hex string.
  • jfk13 6y ago
    Not really. Do you really notice whether someone uses "Grinning face with smiling eyes" or just plain "Grinning face"? Or was it "Grinning face with big eyes", or maybe "Beaming face with smiling eyes". Or were they "squinting" eyes? Maybe the face was just "smiling", not "grinning". Sheesh.
    • jeltz 6y ago
      If you select a good set of clearly ambiguous emojis I could see the use for it. See for example the Matrix spec which recommends using emojis for verifying E2EE signatures. https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/latest#sas-method-emoji https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/latest#sas-method...
      • jfk13 6y ago
        Yes, a carefully selected set of 64 symbols would be much more sensible from that point of view. This project, though, apparently uses "the first 1024 emojis from [https://unicode.org/Public/emoji/13.1/emoji-test.txt https://unicode.org/Public/emoji/13.1/emoji-test.txt]", which is an entirely different matter.