http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=11116603


in reply to Re^2: Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks
in thread Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML and XML, even for "simple" tasks

Except that's not what I said

You said: "Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks". So yeah, you did.

Which is exactly the argument I made in Parsing HTML/XML with Regular Expressions.

ok, but it's what you said here I'm commenting on.

  • Comment on Re^3: Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks
by haukex (Archbishop) on May 09, 2020 at 09:36 UTC
    Noone would claim that parsing that HTML is a simple task.

    Since you're active on both PerlMonks and StackOverflow, you must be aware of the fact that scores of people try to pull stuff from HTML using regexes. My node title is what it is as a response to that.

    You said: "Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks". So yeah, you did.

    Read the what I wrote again keeping in mind what I said above and maybe you'll see that your interpretation of what I said is not what I meant. Unfortunately, it seems that once again your drive to maintain that you are correct appears to be stronger than your drive to be reasonable, so I'm out.