Spheres
Spheres

Spheres

While
While

While

One Second Later
One Second Later

One Second Later

This Is A
This Is A

This Is A

The Feel
The Feel

The Feel

look forward
 look forward

look forward

can't see
 can't see

can't see

spirals
 spirals

spirals

sext
 sext

sext

seconds
 seconds

seconds

🔥 | 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

Family, Friends, and Head: anarchy404x 1d You must understand the weird logic of the left. To them life is priceless and should always be prioritised over property. They would literally let the statue of Liberty burn to save one person. Through inaction let one person starve? You monster, you literally murdered them. Reply Vote tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human life Reblog if you would burn down the statue of liberty to save a life Here’s the thing, though. If you asked a conservative “Would you let the statue of liberty burn to save one life?” they’d probably scoff and say no, it’s a national landmark, a treasure, a piece of too much historical importance to let it be destroyed for the sake of one measly life.  But if you asked, “Would you let the statue of liberty burn in order to save your child? your spouse? someone you loved a great deal?” the tune abruptly changes. At the very least, there’s a hesitation. Even if they deny it, I’m willing to bet that gun to their head, the answer would be “yes.”   The basic problem here is that people have a hard time seeing outside their own sphere of influence, and empathizing beyond the few people who are right in front of them. You’ve got your immediate family, whom you love; your friends, your acquaintances, maybe to a certain degree the people who share a status with you (your religion, your race, etc.)–but beyond that? People aren’t real. They’re theoretical.  But a national monument? That’s real. It stands for something. The value of a non-realized anonymous life that exists completely outside your sphere of influence is clearly worth less than something that represents freedom and prosperity to a whole nation, right? People who think like this lack the compassion to realize that everyone is in someone’s immediate sphere of influence–that everyone is someone’s lover, or brother, or parent. Everyone means the world to someone. And it’s the absolute height of selfishness to assume that their lives don’t have value just because they don’t mean the world to you.  P.S. I would let the statue of liberty burn to save a pigeon. 
Family, Friends, and Head: anarchy404x 1d
 You must understand the weird logic of the left. To
 them life is priceless and should always be
 prioritised over property. They would literally let the
 statue of Liberty burn to save one person. Through
 inaction let one person starve? You monster, you
 literally murdered them.
 Reply Vote
tsunderepup:
randomslasher:

pastel-selkie:

lesbianshepard:
stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human life

Reblog if you would burn down the statue of liberty to save a life

Here’s the thing, though. If you asked a conservative “Would you let the statue of liberty burn to save one life?” they’d probably scoff and say no, it’s a national landmark, a treasure, a piece of too much historical importance to let it be destroyed for the sake of one measly life. 
But if you asked, “Would you let the statue of liberty burn in order to save your child? your spouse? someone you loved a great deal?” the tune abruptly changes. At the very least, there’s a hesitation. Even if they deny it, I’m willing to bet that gun to their head, the answer would be “yes.”  
The basic problem here is that people have a hard time seeing outside their own sphere of influence, and empathizing beyond the few people who are right in front of them. You’ve got your immediate family, whom you love; your friends, your acquaintances, maybe to a certain degree the people who share a status with you (your religion, your race, etc.)–but beyond that? People aren’t real. They’re theoretical. 
But a national monument? That’s real. It stands for something. The value of a non-realized anonymous life that exists completely outside your sphere of influence is clearly worth less than something that represents freedom and prosperity to a whole nation, right?
People who think like this lack the compassion to realize that everyone is in someone’s immediate sphere of influence–that everyone is someone’s lover, or brother, or parent. Everyone means the world to someone. And it’s the absolute height of selfishness to assume that their lives don’t have value just because they don’t mean the world to you. 
P.S. I would let the statue of liberty burn to save a pigeon. 

tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human...