x86 assembly isn't something I'm familiar with (and I should really get back to $dayjob), but I will mention the existence of emoji-test.txt [1] in case somebody wants to try and mine more executable sequences. It might be worth paying attention to the minimally-qualified, unqualified and component lines, which can be added and removed semi freely. No idea if they actually correspond to useful byte sequences.
I don't see why that would matter. Sure, it was noticed on a browser but ultimately this article is about overlap between x86 assembly and a subset of the unicode standard. The browser isn't really involved.
Emoji are text. Which text editor/browser/settings should I be using to ensure I copy your reply accurately?
With the exception of (sigh) newlines, I surely hope your text editor accurately records the characters you paste into it. This job isn't different just because the characters are strange, multi colored ligatures.
Edit: As long as you work in UTF-8 that is, but you have to go out of your way to use any other encoding as an interchange format these days, even if alternative internal encodings aren't uncommon-
Some relatively recent emoji might not work in outdated browsers/operating systems. Generally, emoji font are regularly updated, but if you're using the stock browser (or Safari) on an outdated phone, you might not be able to render a lot of these emoji.
Missing emoji should still be copyable though, it just won't look as funny.
Oh this is delightful!
x86 assembly isn't something I'm familiar with (and I should really get back to $dayjob), but I will mention the existence of emoji-test.txt [1] in case somebody wants to try and mine more executable sequences. It might be worth paying attention to the minimally-qualified, unqualified and component lines, which can be added and removed semi freely. No idea if they actually correspond to useful byte sequences.
[1]: https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/latest/emoji-test.txt
Waiting for someone to an emoji-x86 backend to LLVM/GCC.
For this to be reproducible the browser version is going to need to be specified.
I don't see why that would matter. Sure, it was noticed on a browser but ultimately this article is about overlap between x86 assembly and a subset of the unicode standard. The browser isn't really involved.
It does look like a good "works on my machine" proof-of-concept, but are you going to copy those emoji from something other than a browser?
Probably wouldn't hurt to specify the text editor too and settings needed to match the intended file size as well.
Emoji are text. Which text editor/browser/settings should I be using to ensure I copy your reply accurately?
With the exception of (sigh) newlines, I surely hope your text editor accurately records the characters you paste into it. This job isn't different just because the characters are strange, multi colored ligatures.
Edit: As long as you work in UTF-8 that is, but you have to go out of your way to use any other encoding as an interchange format these days, even if alternative internal encodings aren't uncommon-
Some relatively recent emoji might not work in outdated browsers/operating systems. Generally, emoji font are regularly updated, but if you're using the stock browser (or Safari) on an outdated phone, you might not be able to render a lot of these emoji.
Missing emoji should still be copyable though, it just won't look as funny.