1

What can this phrase possible mean?

And I didn't know kiwis had hair

I have parsed this as well as I can and cannot come up with anything that makes sense.

Reference for context: comment under this StackOverflow Question

Is it a phrase or structure commonly used in some corner of the world?

closed as too localized by FumbleFingers, StoneyB, Hellion, yoozer8, kiamlaluno Dec 21 '12 at 5:44

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 4
    I think it's just someone's little one-off "witticism" alluding to the fact that Do kiwis have hair or feathers? has actually been asked on Wikianswers there. The answer being they're birds, so they have feathers (on the other hand, the kiwi fruit does have a short hair-like coating). Anyway, I think it's Too Localised for ELU. – FumbleFingers Dec 21 '12 at 0:19
  • 1
    @Marthaª will take away my hats; but I agree that this question has not only been completely and terminally answered on unimpeachable authority, but has also been unambiguously shown to be Too Localized. – StoneyB Dec 21 '12 at 2:05
5

It was just a swipe at your "Captain Irrelevant" remark:

Didn't know that code was measured in units of "strength"

Kiwi was chosen because your user name contains it. Pure sarcasm, that's all.*

* No edible berries of the genus Actinidia were harmed in the making of this episode.

  • Okay I've heard of source code robustness, well-formedness, soundness of architecture etc, but have never come across "strength" in relation to it. I thought you were trying to say something rude. Google gives me blank for "strong code", "strength of code", "source code strength" – RichardTheKiwi Dec 21 '12 at 0:51
  • I suppose "having more comprehensive functionality" would have been the correct verbiage. "Stronger" was simply the most expedient thing I could think of at the time. – Robert Harvey Dec 21 '12 at 0:53
4

Something that is a fact, is true, not everyone is expected to know it, but you shouldn't express an extreme surprise or doubt when you learn it.

The comment "Didn't know that code was measured in units of 'strengt'" sounds like the author is casting a doubt on the asker's assertion. So, the asker just answers in a tongue-in-cheek manner playing a pun on the commenter's nickname; purposely misinterpreting a cynical statement as a genuinely informative one, in order to sound playful and not seriously admonishing.

The tongue-in-cheek meaning is "The fact you didn't know is irrelevant to the answer". The literal, intended meaning is "You have a right not to know that fact, but you could have checked, and you'd know there is nothing wrong with that"

Note it's not some idiom, it's just a situational play with words.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.