On this question, I'm seeing bananas in two of the comments:
Am I going bananas?
-
8It's a Unicode character: fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f34c/index.htm– Etienne de MartelCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:41
-
19I see our robot has done well.– MysticialCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:41
-
4@Mysticial: is this robot, perchance, a monkey?– nneonneoCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:42
-
5What's stupid is that minimum character limit– Cat Plus PlusCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:42
-
33This sort of monkey business is not at all appeeling.– jscsCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:44
-
5Is that a banana in your comment, or are you...– Andrew BarberCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:45
-
2btw did you know that bananas are radioactive– Cat Plus PlusCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:46
-
2@0A0D Careful, the first comment answers the question - correctly.– Daniel FischerCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:47
-
9π + π = π ! π– nneonneoCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:47
-
3@0A0D A comment correctly answering the question is constructive, isn't it?– Daniel FischerCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:49
-
2@DanielFischer: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19756/how-do-comments-work It's noise and before anyone says that its just my opinion, every one of those that I have flagged get deleted. They are also not constructive. Something like, "Yes, that was fixed in C# 3.0. What do you not understand about the API changes?", is better than "Yes <crap characters>"– Engineer2021Commented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:51
-
11Constructiveness is not a function of length– Cat Plus PlusCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:54
-
2@0A0D No that's longer not better– Cat Plus PlusCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:54
-
11@0A0D To be fair, "Yes, that was fixed in C# 3.0. What do you not understand about the API changes?" is less constructive than "Yes.ππππππ" because the former is provocative and flame bait.– MysticialCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:58
-
28"Yes.ππππππ" was clearly a constructive comment: the asker responded with "thx.ππππππ". Bananas offered, bananas accepted.– nneonneoCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 19:02
|
Show 14 more comments
2 Answers
Those are instances of U+1F34C Κα΄Ι΄α΄Ι΄α΄. I use them as a filler in comments. I used to use U+2063 ΙͺΙ΄α΄ ΙͺsΙͺΚΚα΄ sα΄α΄α΄Κα΄α΄α΄Κ, but since some people complained they were seeing the invisible separators as squares, I switched to bananas. They also have the advantage of being represented in UTF-16 as surrogate pairs, and thus each counts as 2 for the 15-char limit.
They look like this on my system (Windows 7, Firefox):
Mac OS ships with some fonts with Apple extensions to OpenType that allow the use of colours in glyphs, and that's why you see them flashy like that.
answered Mar 7, 2013 at 18:43
-
16And the moral is that SO is bad at counting length of Unicode strings Commented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:44
-
49
-
17
-
12Bananas are great and healthy. I think this sends a good message to the SO community in general.– user210920Commented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:44
-
2I see the bananas as squares on Chrome/OS X. I want to see these bananas! Commented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:45
-
6@ThinkingStiff Chrome doesn't do font fallback (yes, it's that bad).– user146787Commented Mar 7, 2013 at 18:45
-
2
-
-
-
1
-
-
1
-
2@tohecz your "solutions" suck moar than bananas. It makes users try to clean their screen– PeeHaaCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 19:48
-
2
-
2@CatPlusPlus Quite right: they do not count Unicode characters at all. They only count old-fashioned 16-bit code units. Itβs a known bug.– tchristCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 21:30
It's shorthand for "flag this comment as noise so that it can be removed".
The banana itself is a reference to a famous theorem.
-
8Wouldn't ππππππππππππ be more apt?– nneonneoCommented Mar 7, 2013 at 23:42
-
9
-
1