21

A recipe for COMPLETELY hacking me off - ask for help, pretend my advice is bollocks, then rephrase it as your own and follow it up with a smart arse comment.

"Almond, could you lend me a hand with this regex? I'm trying to match this particular group, but only if it doesn't have 'foo' after it."

"Sure, take a look at negative lookaheads - that sounds like it's exactly what you need"

"Nah that won't work for me, because I need to check for more than one character after it, I need to check for 'foo'"

"What? That doesn't make sense, you can..."

"Ah don't worry, I've found the answer by myself now, I can actually just add '?!' before the text I don't want to match and it'll do it - I'm fast becoming a regex expert here! Let me know if you want me to explain this to you"

DAHHHHHHH THAT IS A NEGATIVE LOOKAHEAD YOU CRETIN

Comments
  • 11
    So, how did your colleague ended up with a keyboard across the face? Was it just an accident?
  • 7
    "oh, great! And I thought a negative lookahead will do.. Can you explain it to me and how it's different from neg lookaheads? Because they surely look very similar. I might have some gaps in my knowledge apparently"
  • 3
    @Jilano It was an accident, sir. He swears.
Add Comment