Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
more useful options
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks

by ikegami (Pope)
on May 09, 2020 at 09:31 UTC ( #11116606=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: 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

Downvoting and ignoring constructive criticism isn't going to convince the people you are supposedly trying to help. When I say it won't convince them, I mean it has always failed to convince them before. I've seen people have made the same argument countless times to no avail. The best results I've seen have been from showing them it's actually easier to do it right. That even appears to be the message you are trying to send with the examples, so it's really just a question of how you frame the problem!

  • Comment on Re^4: Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Why a regex *really* isn't good enough for HTML, even for "simple" tasks (updated)
by haukex (Bishop) on May 09, 2020 at 09:40 UTC
    Downvoting and ignoring constructive criticism isn't going to convince the people you are supposedly trying to help. When I say it won't convince them, I mean it has always failed to convince them before. I've seen people have made the same argument countless times to no avail. The best results I've seen have been from showing them it's actually easier to do it right.

    First of all, I do take criticism, as I've shown time and time again; saying I've ignored it is quite unfair because you haven't even given me a chance to edit my node because I'm here responding to your barrage of posts and ninja edits. Second, your first few posts here were absolutely not "constructive criticism".

    Update: Despite your series of incredibly rude posts here ("Your argument is utterly unconvincing.", "you completely failed", "the people you are supposedly trying to help", which I would normally ignore as trolling), in this case I have made a small edit to the top of the root node. I can only hope you're aware that your "style" of posting seriously reduces the effectiveness of your communication, and in the future I may very well choose to ignore any "advice" from you that isn't actually constructive. Postel's law applies to the sender as well, you know.

    In addition:

    The best results I've seen have been from showing them it's actually easier to do it right.

    I do, all the freaking time (no, really).

    Sometimes, people will still need further convincing or want to know why their approach won't work, which is why I created the root node in the first place, as something to link to that will very likely break their regexes.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://11116606]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (6)
As of 2020-11-30 11:48 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?