"If you have a problem that you're trying to solve with regex, you now have two problems" - Someone

submitted by [deleted] from (imgur.com)

all 4 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]dissent 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I faced this exact dilemma last week. I still have not learned regex

[–]SeasonedReason 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I avoid regex, tried to get into it many times over the years, every time I think I have it locked down, a new case pops up and it falls apart again. Can't beat POL (Plain Old Logic).

[–]Bitchcraft 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How can somebody "not get regex"? What is there not to get? You create a string that describes how the type of string you want to match looks like. That's it.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And then there is LISP ... :)