Prolongation
Prolongation

Prolongation

The Games
The Games

The Games

Kind
Kind

Kind

Many
Many

Many

Part
Part

Part

The
The

The

Love Is
Love Is

Love Is

But
But

But

Grandparents
Grandparents

Grandparents

That
That

That

🔥 | Latest

Beautiful, Community, and God: 21 Answers votes oldest newest You can't parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can't be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool that can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here so many times before, the use of regex will not allow you to consume HTML. Regular expressions are a tool that is insufficiently sophisticated to understand the constructs employed by HTML. HTML is not a regular language and hence cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Regex queries are not equipped to break down HTML into its meaningful parts. so many times but it is not getting to me. Even enhanced irregular regular expressions as used by Perl are not up to the task of parsing HTML. You will never make me crack. HTML is a language of sufficient complexity that it cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Even Jon Skeet cannot parse HTML using regular expressions. Every time you attempt to parse HTML with regular expressions, the unholy child weeps the blood of virgins, and Russian hackers pwn your webapp. Parsing HTML with regex summons tainted souls into the realm of the living. HTML and regex go together like love, marriage, and ritual infanticide. The <center> cannot hold it is too late. The force of regex and HTML together in the same conceptual space will destroy your mind like so much watery putty. If you parse HTML with regex you are giving in to Them and their blasphemous ways which doom us all to inhuman toil for the One whose Name cannot be expressed in the Basic Multilingual Plane, he comes. HTML-plus-regexp will liquify the nerves of the sentient whilst you observe, your psyche withering in the onslaught of horror. Regex-based HTML parsers are the cancer that is killing StackOverflow it is too late it is too late we cannot be saved the trangession of a child ensures regex will consume all living tissue (except for HTML which it cannot, as previously prophesied) dear lord help us how can anyone survive this scourge using regex to parse HTML has doomed humanity to an eternity of dread torture and security holes using regex as a tool to process HTML establishes a breach between this world and the dread realm of čorrupt entities (like SGML entities, but more corrupt) a mere glimpse of the world of reg ex parsers for HTML will instantly transport a programmer's consciousness into a world of ceaseless screaming, he comes-the pestilent slithy regex-infection will devour your HTML parser, application and existence for all time like Vişual Basic only worse he comes he comes do not fight he comes, his uņholy radiance destroping all enlightenment, HTML tags leaking frọm your eyesiike liquid pain, the song of regular expression parsing-will extinguish the voices of mortal man from the sphere I can see it can you see t it is beautiful the f inal snuf fing of the lies of Man ALL ĮS LOSTALL IS LOST the pony he comes he comes hejcemes the ichor permeates al MY FACEFACEh god no NO NOOoo Ne stop the an ges aře not reâj ZALGO IS TON THË PONY, HECOMES 1811 Have you tried using an XML parser instead? link edit flag edited Nov 14 at 0:18 community wiki bobince regex and html
Beautiful, Community, and God: 21 Answers
 votes
 oldest
 newest
 You can't parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can't be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool that
 can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here so many
 times before, the use of regex will not allow you to consume HTML. Regular expressions are a tool that is
 insufficiently sophisticated to understand the constructs employed by HTML. HTML is not a regular
 language and hence cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Regex queries are not equipped to break
 down HTML into its meaningful parts. so many times but it is not getting to me. Even enhanced irregular
 regular expressions as used by Perl are not up to the task of parsing HTML. You will never make me
 crack. HTML is a language of sufficient complexity that it cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Even
 Jon Skeet cannot parse HTML using regular expressions. Every time you attempt to parse HTML with
 regular expressions, the unholy child weeps the blood of virgins, and Russian hackers pwn your webapp.
 Parsing HTML with regex summons tainted souls into the realm of the living. HTML and regex go together
 like love, marriage, and ritual infanticide. The <center> cannot hold it is too late. The force of regex and
 HTML together in the same conceptual space will destroy your mind like so much watery putty. If you
 parse HTML with regex you are giving in to Them and their blasphemous ways which doom us all to
 inhuman toil for the One whose Name cannot be expressed in the Basic Multilingual Plane, he comes.
 HTML-plus-regexp will liquify the nerves of the sentient whilst you observe, your psyche withering in the
 onslaught of horror. Regex-based HTML parsers are the cancer that is killing StackOverflow it is too late
 it is too late we cannot be saved the trangession of a child ensures regex will consume all living tissue
 (except for HTML which it cannot, as previously prophesied) dear lord help us how can anyone survive
 this scourge using regex to parse HTML has doomed humanity to an eternity of dread torture and
 security holes using regex as a tool to process HTML establishes a breach between this world and the
 dread realm of čorrupt entities (like SGML entities, but more corrupt) a mere glimpse of the world of reg
 ex parsers for HTML will instantly transport a programmer's consciousness into a world of ceaseless
 screaming, he comes-the pestilent slithy regex-infection will devour your HTML parser, application and
 existence for all time like Vişual Basic only worse he comes he comes do not fight he comes, his uņholy
 radiance destroping all enlightenment, HTML tags leaking frọm your eyesiike liquid pain, the song of
 regular expression parsing-will extinguish the voices of mortal man from the sphere I can see it can you
 see t it is beautiful the f inal snuf fing of the lies of Man ALL ĮS LOSTALL IS LOST the pony he
 comes he comes hejcemes the ichor permeates al MY FACEFACEh god no NO NOOoo Ne
 stop the an ges aře not reâj ZALGO IS TON THË PONY, HECOMES
 1811
 Have you tried using an XML parser instead?
 link edit flag
 edited Nov 14 at 0:18
 community wiki
 bobince
regex and html

regex and html

Being Alone, Bad, and Family: NEW EPISODE CN CARTOETw I WAS TERRIBLE TO YOU. I LIKED TAKING EVERYTHING OUT ON YO.. beta-kindergarten: Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and especially to my fellow survivors who see themselves in Jasper: SU has /never/ been ambiguous regarding who was in control of malachite. It was undoubtedly Lapis up until SWI, and even then you could say she and Jasper were working together to fight the CGs. Abuse by definition NEEDS to have a power imbalance between the victim and abuser. Jasper was never allowed that power, while Lapis is always described as the one who was in control, therefore Lapis was the abuser and Jasper was the victim. Victims aren’t always good people. Jasper is very much a victim of circumstance, both from the war and from Malachite. Yes, she’s abusive, but towards the corrupted gems, and has yet to be given a chance to unlearn her toxic behaviors. She’s a messy victim, she’s aggressive and angry, and there are so many survivors who act like this; and guess what, they’re still victims. Having “ugly” symptoms and feeling affection for your abuser does NOT make you the abuser of the relationship. It doesn’t undermine your abuse and certainly doesn’t justify it, no matter what vitriol this fandom tries to spew at you because you see Jasper as the victim. Abusers aren’t always going to be your enemy. They aren’t always going to be bigger than you, or physically stronger. They can be friends or family or “beach summer fun buddies”. They can be nice sometimes and absolutely terrible other times. And they can also have traumas of their own. This doesn’t change or excuse the fact that they’re abusive. Lapis is this kind of abuser. She was the one holding the chains, the one who acknowledges her own power (and fears being placed in positions of control because of it), and the one who regrets her decisions and is trying to stop being abusive. Frankly I don’t care about protagonist centered morality enough to even consider Steven’s point of view regarding Malachite. I don’t care what the CGs in the show have to say about the situation because regardless of how much of a “terrible” person Jasper is, it’s presented clearly to us who was the one being held in chains against their will. I also cannot be bothered to care about your definitions of “lashing out” or, “self-blaming”. Lapis made her intentions painfully clear that this was for revenge and wanting to take out everything on someone. She doesn’t love the earth nor does she want to play nice with the CGs. So don’t even try to tell me this because I’m frankly just /tired/ of being reminded that you people don’t actually care about victims if our behaviors or coping mechanisms are “wrong” to you. Also, of the 2 years that I’ve been involved in this hell fandom I’ve yet to see Jasper fans attack the inboxes or posts of Lapis fans to the same extent that the reverse has been done. Jasper fans don’t spread ugly rumors about Rebecca Sugar’s abuse history either, so it’s pretty ironic that WE’RE the ones who condone abuse isn’t it? tl;dr: You’re honestly disgusting if you’ve EVER tried to make a victim feel bad for liking Jasper, and I sincerely hope you grow up some day and learn that it’s not worth it to harm real people and survivors for the sake of a cartoon. And if you’re a victim who relates to Jasper, believe me when I say you aren’t alone and you aren’t a bad person. Keep doing you. ✌️
Being Alone, Bad, and Family: NEW EPISODE
 CN
 CARTOETw

 I WAS TERRIBLE TO YOU.

 I LIKED TAKING EVERYTHING OUT ON YO..
beta-kindergarten:

Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and especially to my fellow survivors who see themselves in Jasper:

SU has /never/ been ambiguous regarding who was in control of malachite. It was undoubtedly Lapis up until SWI, and even then you could say she and Jasper were working together to fight the CGs. Abuse by definition NEEDS to have a power imbalance between the victim and abuser. Jasper was never allowed that power, while Lapis is always described as the one who was in control, therefore Lapis was the abuser and Jasper was the victim.

Victims aren’t always good people. Jasper is very much a victim of circumstance, both from the war and from Malachite. Yes, she’s abusive, but towards the corrupted gems, and has yet to be given a chance to unlearn her toxic behaviors. She’s a messy victim, she’s aggressive and angry, and there are so many survivors who act like this; and guess what, they’re still victims. Having “ugly” symptoms and feeling affection for your abuser does NOT make you the abuser of the relationship. It doesn’t undermine your abuse and certainly doesn’t justify it, no matter what vitriol this fandom tries to spew at you because you see Jasper as the victim.

Abusers aren’t always going to be your enemy. They aren’t always going to be bigger than you, or physically stronger. They can be friends or family or “beach summer fun buddies”. They can be nice sometimes and absolutely terrible other times. And they can also have traumas of their own. This doesn’t change or excuse the fact that they’re abusive. Lapis is this kind of abuser. She was the one holding the chains, the one who acknowledges her own power (and fears being placed in positions of control because of it), and the one who regrets her decisions and is trying to stop being abusive. 

Frankly I don’t care about protagonist centered morality enough to even consider Steven’s point of view regarding Malachite. I don’t care what the CGs in the show have to say about the situation because regardless of how much of a “terrible” person Jasper is, it’s presented clearly to us who was the one being held in chains against their will. I also cannot be bothered to care about your definitions of “lashing out” or, “self-blaming”. Lapis made her intentions painfully clear that this was for revenge and wanting to take out everything on someone. She doesn’t love the earth nor does she want to play nice with the CGs. So don’t even try to tell me this because I’m frankly just /tired/ of being reminded that you people don’t actually care about victims if our behaviors or coping mechanisms are “wrong” to you. 

Also, of the 2 years that I’ve been involved in this hell fandom I’ve yet to see Jasper fans attack the inboxes or posts of Lapis fans to the same extent that the reverse has been done. Jasper fans don’t spread ugly rumors about Rebecca Sugar’s abuse history either, so it’s pretty ironic that WE’RE the ones who condone abuse isn’t it?

tl;dr: You’re honestly disgusting if you’ve EVER tried to make a victim feel bad for liking Jasper, and I sincerely hope you grow up some day and learn that it’s not worth it to harm real people and survivors for the sake of a cartoon. And if you’re a victim who relates to Jasper, believe me when I say you aren’t alone and you aren’t a bad person. Keep doing you. ✌️

beta-kindergarten: Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and es...

Animals, Deer, and Fucking: I HAVE TINY CRUSTACEANS STUCK IN MY GILLS! I'M HUNGRY FOR SEA BUGS! WHITETIP SHARK CLEANER WRASSE I NEED SOMEONE TO CARRY MY POLLEN TO OTHER FLOWERS I NEED NECTAR TO EAT! TICKSEED FLOWERS BUCKEYE BUTTERFLY l'M LOOKING FOR A BIG MEAL, BUT I NEED HELP FINDING A DEER I WANT TO EAT VENISON, BUT I'M TOO SMALL TO HUNT DEER! COMMON RAVEN COYOTE I NEED SOMEONE TO KEEP ANTS FROM EATING MY EGGS! I WANT A HOME WITH A BODYGUARD AND FREE ANT DELIVERY INCLUDED! COLOMBIAN LESSERBLACK TARANTULA DOTTED HUMMING FROG M. TILLERY - CYANEUS.COM /w/Av[ paramud: personal-scientist: draconym: themaishi: draconym: Mutualistic pairs for an “Odd Couples” Valentine’s program at my work. (Why do so many of my big work projects revolve around Valentine’s programs?) Also, by “sea bugs,” I obviously meant “gnathiid isopod larvae.” The himan one is not as good as the rest If you mean the mutualism between humans and honeyguides, I respectfully disagree. Human/honeyguide mutualism is one of the most sophisticated interspecies relationships in the animal kingdom. While humans have domesticated many other animals for their labor, the honeyguide remains entirely wild while electing to partner up with humans. Both humans and honeyguides have each developed specific calls to signal to one another that they are on the hunt, and these calls greatly increase the likelihood of success. According to this paper: The production of this sound increased the probability of being guided by a honeyguide from about 33 to 66% and the overall probability of thus finding a bees’ nest from 17 to 54%, as compared with other animal or human sounds of similar amplitude. That’s fucking bonkers, you guys!!! There are people out there who over the course of human history have created a sound to communicate with birds, and the birds themselves have a Human Call they use to communicate with us. There is no other wild animal you can just make noises at and immediately communicate that you want it to come help you!!! What’s more, many scientists consider this relationship more exploitative on the honeyguide’s end than on our end! That’s unprecedented!! These birds have essentially negotiated a trade deal with humanity!!!! This is the stuff of fantasy movies, except it’s real. Here’s an article from The Guardian about the broader implications of this kind of relationship with wild animals. It’s a good read: Apart from with our gut bacteria, we humans don’t really have any mutualistic relationships with other creatures. There is no special tune that we can sing to magically attract nearby hedgehogs into our gardens to feast on slugs. There will never be a special wink that fishermen can offer otters, encouraging them to catch fish that we might then de-bone for them, in return for some of the catch. The world is poorer for this. OKAY BUT the noise we make at honeyguides is one of my favorite noises there is, and if y’all haven’t heard the “BRRR-HM?” call that hunters use to summon honeyguides you are SERIOUSLY missing out. There’s an audio clip on the Audobon Society’s article about them [link] @metalpaca
Animals, Deer, and Fucking: I HAVE TINY CRUSTACEANS
 STUCK IN MY GILLS!
 I'M HUNGRY FOR SEA BUGS!
 WHITETIP SHARK
 CLEANER WRASSE
 I NEED SOMEONE TO CARRY
 MY POLLEN TO OTHER FLOWERS
 I NEED NECTAR TO EAT!
 TICKSEED FLOWERS
 BUCKEYE BUTTERFLY
 l'M LOOKING FOR A BIG MEAL,
 BUT I NEED HELP FINDING A DEER
 I WANT TO EAT VENISON, BUT
 I'M TOO SMALL TO HUNT DEER!
 COMMON RAVEN
 COYOTE
 I NEED SOMEONE TO KEEP
 ANTS FROM EATING MY EGGS!
 I WANT A HOME WITH A BODYGUARD
 AND FREE ANT DELIVERY INCLUDED!
 COLOMBIAN LESSERBLACK TARANTULA
 DOTTED HUMMING FROG
 M. TILLERY - CYANEUS.COM
 /w/Av[
paramud:

personal-scientist:
draconym:

themaishi:

draconym:

Mutualistic pairs for an “Odd Couples” Valentine’s program at my work. (Why do so many of my big work projects revolve around Valentine’s programs?)
Also, by “sea bugs,” I obviously meant “gnathiid isopod larvae.”


The himan one is not as good as the rest 

If you mean the mutualism between humans and honeyguides, I respectfully disagree. Human/honeyguide mutualism is one of the most sophisticated interspecies relationships in the animal kingdom.
While humans have domesticated many other animals for their labor, the honeyguide remains entirely wild while electing to partner up with humans. Both humans and honeyguides have each developed specific calls to signal to one another that they are on the hunt, and these calls greatly increase the likelihood of success. According to this paper:
The production of this sound increased the probability of being guided 
by a honeyguide from about 33 to 66% and the overall probability of thus
 finding a bees’ nest from 17 to 54%, as compared with other animal or 
human sounds of similar amplitude.
That’s fucking bonkers, you guys!!! There are people out there who over the course of human history have created a sound to communicate with birds, and the birds themselves have a Human Call they use to communicate with us. There is no other wild animal you can just make noises at and immediately communicate that you want it to come help you!!!
What’s more, many scientists consider this relationship more exploitative on the honeyguide’s end than on our end! That’s unprecedented!! These birds have essentially negotiated a trade deal with humanity!!!! This is the stuff of fantasy movies, except it’s real.
Here’s an article from The Guardian about the broader implications of this kind of relationship with wild animals. It’s a good read:

Apart from with our gut bacteria, we humans don’t really have any 
mutualistic relationships with other creatures. There is no special tune
 that we can sing to magically attract nearby hedgehogs into our gardens
 to feast on slugs. There will never be a special wink that fishermen 
can offer otters, encouraging them to catch fish that we might then 
de-bone for them, in return for some of the catch. The world is poorer 
for this.



OKAY BUT the noise we make at honeyguides is one of my favorite noises there is, and if y’all haven’t heard the “BRRR-HM?” call that hunters use to summon honeyguides you are SERIOUSLY missing out. 
There’s an audio clip on the Audobon Society’s article about them [link]


@metalpaca

paramud: personal-scientist: draconym: themaishi: draconym: Mutualistic pairs for an “Odd Couples” Valentine’s program at my work. (Why ...