[{"_1":2,"_194":-5,"_195":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_58":59,"_193":-5},"root",{"_5":6,"_19":-5,"_20":-5,"_21":22,"_39":-5,"_40":-5,"_41":-5,"_42":43,"_54":55,"_56":57},"env",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":12,"_13":14,"_15":16,"_17":18},"SUPABASE_URL","https://hello.websim.com","SUPABASE_KEY","eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJzdXBhYmFzZSIsInJlZiI6Im9jamVmZ2NqamlxeWt3YWR2dnJkIiwicm9sZSI6ImFub24iLCJpYXQiOjE3MTE4MzI5OTMsImV4cCI6MjAyNzQwODk5M30.vsreOYwk8pKsr8NFlzpIzWAiD-vXj6ijv_Bhn1vYtHs","POSTHOG_KEY","phc_VHMOlrdxAbgSZHeF0SdSf07LZLRLAg5pZuTHkJGn050","POSTHOG_API_HOST","https://e.wbsm.ai","POSTHOG_UI_HOST","https://app.posthog.com","GOOGLE_OAUTH_CLIENT_ID","891181648870-i708rj1bgjol84hie20shfr4u4ecf3o7.apps.googleusercontent.com","authUser","user","snapshotData",{"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":-5,"_26":-5,"_27":-5,"_28":-5,"_29":-5,"_30":-5,"_31":-5,"_32":-5,"_33":-5,"_34":-5,"_35":-5,"_36":-5,"_37":-5,"_38":-5},"lastProjectId","sidebarTab","homepageTab","pinSidebar","settingsOpen","maximized","assetsExpanded","focusedAssetFilename","authError","authErrorCode","authErrorDescription","sidebarWidth","videoMuted","videoVolume","navigationContext","hasSeenFeedOnboarding","plan","balances","rewards","origins",{"_44":45,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53},"origin","https://websim.com","apiOrigin","https://api.websim.com","contentOrigin","https://{PROJECT_ID}.c.websim.com","appDomainOrigin","https://{SUBDOMAIN}.on.websim.com","generationOrigin","https://generation.websim.com/rivet","isMobile",false,"theme","auto","slug",{"_60":61,"_62":63,"_124":125,"_146":147,"_179":180,"_181":-5,"_182":183},"version","1","project",{"_64":62,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_82":83,"_84":85,"_86":87,"_88":89,"_90":91,"_92":-5,"_93":-5,"_94":-5,"_95":-5,"_96":97,"_98":99,"_58":109,"_110":55,"_111":55,"_112":113,"_114":-5,"_115":-5,"_116":117,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"_type","id","9b7xpv_jgo6h7jbkidjn","created_at","2025-03-07T13:46:24.825Z","created_by",{"_64":20,"_65":71,"_72":73,"_67":74,"_75":76,"_77":78,"_79":80,"_81":55},"0c11cb8e-58e5-4252-a085-075d21d93660","username","M1nc3r4f573r","2025-02-04T13:00:34.455Z","avatar_url","https://avatars.websim.com/0c11cb8e-58e5-4252-a085-075d21d93660/erwPU7PnhDRA5W6s3.webp","discord_username","m1nc3r_","discord_id","1335968591161589780","is_admin","updated_at","2025-04-04T16:15:14.386Z","title","Tomato News (Now with Images) ","comments_mode","open","visibility","public","current_version",65,"last_posted_version","parent_id","parent_version","deleted_at","posted",true,"stats",{"_100":101,"_102":66,"_103":104,"_105":106,"_107":108},"~type","project_stats","project_id","views",923,"likes",21,"comments",10,"tomato-news","auto_set_current","enable_chat","description","Tomato News, like any other vegetable news, is plugged into misinformation generator 3000 just for the funzies. Use the search bar to explore 110% percent real news articles.","generated_description","from_template","domains",[118],{"_119":120,"_82":121},"name","tomato-news.on.websim.ai","2025-03-26T04:30:07.824Z","thumbnail","video","project_revision",{"_64":124,"_65":126,"_60":91,"_67":127,"_128":-5,"_93":-5,"_129":130,"_131":66,"_69":132,"_133":134,"_102":66,"_82":135,"_95":-5,"_98":136,"_139":55,"_140":141,"_142":-5,"_143":-5,"_144":145},"0195d67f-607b-7b46-9e64-7df31e25a3d4","2025-03-27T07:27:06.875Z","visited_at","parent_revision_version",63,"parent_revision_project_id",{"_64":20,"_65":71,"_72":73,"_67":74,"_75":76,"_77":78,"_79":80,"_81":55},"meta",{"_60":61},"2025-04-04T16:15:14.494Z",{"_137":138},"multiplayer_count",0,"draft","site_id","EFr0SScccTtja5dsC","chat_session_id","chat_session_run_index","current_screenshot_url","https://project-screenshots.websim.com/0195d686-9fe4-70e9-bab4-dc603809ddb1","site",{"_64":146,"_65":141,"_93":148,"_67":149,"_150":151,"_152":153,"_154":155,"_84":163,"_164":165,"_166":167,"_172":-5,"_173":174,"_175":176,"_95":-5,"_177":178},"Evy3kaeOsf5e28dgA","2025-03-27T07:27:08.160Z","state","done","model","deepseek-r1","lore",{"_60":156,"_157":158,"_159":55,"_160":97,"_161":97,"_162":55},1,"attachments",[],"enableMobilePrompt","enableDB","enableLLM2","enableApi","Tomato News","owner",{"_64":20,"_65":71,"_72":73,"_67":74,"_75":76,"_77":78,"_79":80,"_81":55},"prompt",{"_168":169,"_170":171},"type","plaintext","text","The ai image regex tests true for `` but tests false for ``. Find out why and ensure.a functional regex.","url","link_url","/p/9b7xpv_jgo6h7jbkidjn","versioned_link_url","/p/9b7xpv_jgo6h7jbkidjn/65","yapping","\nAlright, let's tackle this problem. The user is having issues with their regex not matching certain tags. The example given is that the regex works for the first tag but fails for the second one.\n\nFirst, I need to look at the current regex they're using. From the previous code, the regex was: //gi.\n\nLooking at the two examples, the first tag has prompt and alt attributes, and the second one also has both. The difference might be in the attributes' order or additional spaces. Wait, in the second example, the alt text has a period inside the quotes. Does the regex handle that? The current pattern for alt is ([^\"']+), which captures any sequence except \" or '. If the alt text includes an apostrophe or quote, it would break, but in the example, the alt is \"Protestors in London expressing their concern.\" which doesn't have quotes. Hmm, maybe it's the spacing.\n\nWait, the regex uses \\s+ between attributes. In the second example, after the prompt, there's a space before alt. The regex should catch that. Let me check the regex again. The regex looks for prompt attribute first, then optionally alt. But maybe the second tag has attributes in a different order, like alt before prompt? No, in the examples, both have prompt first.\n\nWait, the second example's prompt has an apostrophe in \"Reclaim Humanity!\"—but the regex uses [^\"'] which would stop at the apostrophe. Oh! Because the prompt is enclosed in double quotes, the apostrophe in 'Reclaim Humanity!' is allowed. Wait, no—the prompt is in double quotes, so the apostrophe is fine. The regex for prompt is [\"']([^\"']+)[\"'], which would capture everything between the quotes. But if the prompt has a double quote inside, it would terminate early. But in the given example, the prompt doesn't have any quotes.\n\nWait, maybe the issue is with the closing tag. The first example is a self-closing tag with />, while the second one is a full tag. The current regex has \\/?> at the end, which matches both /> and >. So that shouldn't be the problem.\n\nWait, looking at the second example: the opening tag is . The regex is designed to match self-closing tags or not. The regex ends with \\/?>, which would match > or />. But in the second case, the tag isn't self-closing; it has a separate closing tag. However, the regex is only matching the opening tag. So the regex should still capture the attributes from the opening tag, regardless of the closing tag. But in the code, when processing, maybe the regex is only looking for self-closing tags. Wait, no—the regex is looking for the opening tag, whether it's self-closed or not.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the regex is missing the possibility of other attributes or different ordering. The current regex expects prompt first, then alt. If the alt comes before prompt, the regex wouldn't capture it. But in the examples, both have prompt first.\n\nWait, let's look at the second example's prompt: it's quite long, with single quotes in the signs. The regex's prompt part is ([^\"']+), which would capture until the next \" or '. Since the prompt is enclosed in double quotes, any ' inside is allowed. So the regex should capture the entire prompt. But maybe there's a space or another character that's causing it to stop.\n\nWait, perhaps the regex is using [^\"']+ which matches any character except \" or ', but if the prompt has a ' inside, and the attribute is enclosed in \", that's fine. For example, in the first example, the prompt has a ' in \"man's\", but the attribute is in double quotes, so the regex should capture up to the closing \".\n\nWait, the problem might be that the regex is looking for the alt attribute as optional, but in the second example, maybe there's a space after the alt attribute. Let me check the regex again: (?:\\s+alt\\s*=\\s*[\"']([^\"']*)[\"'])? So it's looking for alt after prompt, with any whitespace. But if there are other attributes, the regex would fail. But in the examples, there are only prompt and alt.\n\nWait, the user's second example has a closing tag, but the regex is only matching the opening tag. However, the code is using a global regex and exec, so it should find all occurrences. Wait, in the code, the processAiImageTags function uses a while loop with exec, which should find all matches. But maybe the regex is not global? Let me check: in the code, the regex is declared as //gi. The 'g' flag is present, so it should find all matches.\n\nWait, maybe the second example's prompt has a trailing space or another character that's causing the regex to fail. Alternatively, perhaps the regex is too strict in expecting exactly prompt and alt, and in some cases, there are other attributes or the order is different.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the regex is not allowing for optional spaces correctly. Let's break down the regex:\n\n- : closing tag, with optional /.\n\nWait, the alt part is ([^\"']*), which allows for empty alt text. But in the second example, the alt is present. So the regex should capture it.\n\nWait, maybe the issue is that in the second example, the alt text has a period, but that's not an issue. The regex should capture any characters except \" or '.\n\nWait, perhaps the issue is that the regex is expecting the alt attribute to come immediately after the prompt, but in some cases, there might be other attributes or the order is different. But in the examples provided, the order is prompt then alt.\n\nWait, maybe in the second example, the regex is failing because the alt text has a closing quote followed by >, and the regex is expecting /> or >. Let me see: the second example's opening tag ends with \">. The regex ends with \\/?>, which would match the >, so that's fine.\n\nHmm, perhaps the problem is that the regex is expecting the prompt attribute to be immediately after the tag name, but in reality, there could be other attributes in between. Wait, no—the regex uses \\s+ after the tag name, which skips any whitespace, then looks for prompt. So as long as prompt is the first attribute, it's fine. If another attribute comes first, it would fail. But in the examples, prompt is first.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the regex is not capturing the alt text correctly because the alt group is optional. Wait, in the second example, the alt is present, so the regex should capture it.\n\nWait, perhaps the regex is using ([^\"']+) for the prompt, which is greedy, but if the alt is present, it might be consuming part of the prompt. Let me test this.\n\nIn the first example, the prompt is \"A side-by-side image comparison... The background is a neutral grey.\" and the alt is \"A side-by-side comparison...\". The regex captures the prompt as everything between the first \" and the next \", which is correct. Then, the alt is captured as the next attribute.\n\nIn the second example, the prompt is \"Large crowd of protestors in London... Houses of Parliament.\" and the alt is \"Protestors in London...\". The regex should capture the prompt correctly, then the alt.\n\nWait, perhaps the issue is that the regex uses ([^\"']+) for the prompt, but if the prompt contains an apostrophe (single quote), and the attribute is enclosed in double quotes, it's okay. For example, if the prompt is in double quotes, any single quotes inside are allowed. So the regex should capture up to the closing double quote.\n\nBut in the second example, the prompt is enclosed in double quotes and has no single quotes. So the regex should capture the entire prompt.\n\nI'm not seeing the issue here. Maybe the problem is elsewhere in the code. Let's look at the code that processes the ai-image tags.\n\nIn the processAiImageTags function, the regex is declared with exec in a loop. For each match, it extracts the prompt and alt text. Then, it replaces the entire tag with the generated image HTML.\n\nWait, but in the second example, the tag is not self-closing; it has a separate closing tag. The regex is designed to match the opening tag, regardless of whether it's self-closing or not. So the regex should still capture the attributes from the opening tag.\n\nAh, here's the problem! The current regex is only matching the opening tag if it's either self-closed (/>) or just >. However, if the opening tag is not self-closed and has a separate closing tag, the regex might not capture the entire opening tag. Wait, no—the regex stops at the first >, which is the end of the opening tag, even if there's a separate closing tag. So the regex should still capture the attributes correctly.\n\nWait, but in the second example, the opening tag is . The regex would match the opening tag up to the >, capturing prompt and alt. Then, the rest of the content (the closing tag) is left in the processedContent. But in the replacement, the entire tag (opening and closing) should be replaced. Wait, no—the code's regex is only matching the opening tag, and replacing it with the image HTML. But the original tag has a closing , which would remain in the content, leading to invalid HTML.\n\nWait, the code's replacement is removing the entire tag (opening and closing?) No, in the code, the regex is matching the entire opening tag, including the closing > or />. For example, in the first example, the tag is self-closing, so the regex matches the entire . In the second example, the opening tag is , so the regex matches up to the >, leaving the in the content. That's a problem! The replacement would replace the opening tag with the image HTML, but the closing tag remains, causing invalid HTML.\n\nSo the issue is that the regex is not matching the entire element, including the closing tag. The current regex only matches the opening tag, whether it's self-closing or not. But in the case of a non-self-closed tag with a separate closing tag, the regex replaces only the opening part, leaving the closing tag in the content. This would result in an extra in the HTML, which is invalid and could cause layout issues. However, the user's problem is that the regex is not matching the second example at all, which is a different issue.\n\nWait, the user says that the regex tests true for the first example but false for the second. So in the second example, the regex isn't matching the opening tag at all. Why?\n\nLooking at the second example's opening tag: \n\nThe prompt attribute's value includes single quotes inside the double-quoted attribute. The regex for the prompt is ([^\"']+), which captures any character except \" or '. Since the prompt is enclosed in \", the ' inside are allowed. So the regex should capture up to the closing \", which is correct. The alt is then captured as \"Protestors in London expressing their concern.\", which is also fine.\n\nBut perhaps the regex is failing because of the . in the prompt. Wait, no—the . is just a regular character. The regex is looking for any character except \" or ', so . is allowed.\n\nWait, maybe the regex is failing because the alt attribute's value includes a period, but that's irrelevant. The regex captures any characters except \" or ' for the alt text.\n\nAlternatively, perhaps the regex is not allowing for spaces between attributes. Let's look at the regex:\n\nThe prompt part is \\s+prompt\\s*=\\s*[\"']([^\"']+)[\"'], then the alt part is (?:\\s+alt\\s*=\\s*[\"']([^\"']*)[\"'])?.\n\nIn the second example, after the prompt attribute, there's a space before alt. The \\s+ in the alt part would match that space. So the regex should capture the alt attribute.\n\nWait, maybe the issue is that the regex uses \\s+ between the attributes, which requires one or more whitespace. If there's only one space, it's fine. But in the second example, there's a space after the prompt's closing quote and before alt. So the regex should match that.\n\nHmm, I'm not seeing the issue. Maybe the regex is correct, but in the code, the way it's being used is causing the problem. Let's check the code again.\n\nIn the processAiImageTags function, the regex is declared as:\n\nconst aiImageRegex = //gi;\n\nWait, in the alt group, the capturing group is ([^\"']+)—but the alt text in the second example ends with a period. The + quantifier requires at least one character. If the alt text is empty, it would not capture, but in the example, it's present.\n\nWait, in the second example, the alt text is \"Protestors in London expressing their concern.\"—so it's non-empty. The regex should capture it.\n\nMaybe the problem is that the regex is using + instead of * for the alt text. Wait, no—the alt group is optional, and the capturing group uses +, which would require at least one character if the alt is present. But in the example, the alt is present, so it's fine.\n\nAlternatively, perhaps the regex is not case-sensitive, but the tags are lowercase, so that's not the issue.\n\nAt this point, I'm not sure why the second example isn't matching. Perhaps the regex needs to be adjusted to allow for any order of attributes or more flexibility.\n\nThe current regex assumes that prompt is the first attribute. If the alt comes first, it won't be captured. But in the examples, the order is prompt then alt.\n\nAnother possibility is that the regex is not correctly handling the optional slash before the closing >. For example, in the second example, the opening tag ends with >, not />. The regex allows for \\/?>, which matches either > or />. So that's fine.\n\nWait, perhaps the issue is that the regex is expecting the tag to be self-closing, but in the second example, it's not. However, the regex's \\/?> allows for either case.\n\nMaybe the problem is that the regex is not matching the entire opening tag when there are multiple attributes with different spacing. Let's test the regex against the second example's opening tag:\n\n\nThe regex breakdown:\n\n- : closing > or />.\n\nIn the second example, after the prompt, there's a space, then alt. So the \\s+ in the non-capturing group matches the space. The alt is captured correctly.\n\nHmm. Maybe the issue is that the regex is not accounting for possible other attributes between prompt and alt. But in the examples, there are no other attributes.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the regex is not matching because of the . in the alt text. But the alt text is enclosed in quotes, and the regex captures everything inside the quotes except \" or '.\n\nWait, in the second example's alt text, there's a period at the end: \"Protestors in London expressing their concern.\"—but that's just a normal character, so the regex should capture it.\n\nI'm stuck. Maybe the regex needs to be adjusted to be more permissive. Let's consider using a non-greedy approach for the prompt and alt attributes. Alternatively, use a regex that allows any order of attributes.\n\nPerhaps the issue is that the current regex is too strict in the order of attributes. If the alt comes before the prompt, it won't be captured. But the user's examples have prompt first.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the regex should capture any prompt and alt attributes regardless of their order. To do that, the regex can use a more flexible approach, like using .*? to skip over other attributes.\n\nBut changing the regex to be more flexible could introduce other issues. However, given the problem, perhaps the current regex is too rigid.\n\nAn alternative approach is to use a regex that captures the prompt and alt attributes regardless of their order. For example:\n\n/]+)\\/?>/gi\n\nThen, parse the attributes from the captured group. But that would require additional parsing.\n\nAlternatively, use a regex that looks for prompt and alt in any order:\n\n/(prompt\\s*=\\s*[\"']([^\"']*)[\"']|alt\\s*=\\s*[\"']([^\"']*)[\"'])/gi\n\nBut this would require multiple passes.\n\nAlternatively, use a regex that captures both attributes in any order. For example:\n\n//gi\n\nBut this is more complex.\n\nGiven the time constraints, perhaps the best approach is to adjust the regex to allow for any order of prompt and alt attributes.\n\nAlternatively, perhaps the issue is that the regex is using \\s+ between the tag name and the prompt attribute. If there are multiple spaces or line breaks, it's okay, but if the prompt is not the first attribute, it would fail.\n\nIn the user's second example, the prompt is the first attribute, so that's fine.\n\nHmm. Maybe the regex is functional, and the issue is elsewhere in the code. For example, when the code processes the matches, maybe it's not handling all the groups correctly.\n\nLooking at the code:\n\nIn the processAiImageTags function, the regex is executed in a loop. For each match, it extracts match[1] as the prompt and match[2] as the alt.\n\nIn the second example, the regex should capture the prompt and alt. But if the regex is not matching, then match would be null.\n\nBut why isn't it matching? Maybe because of a typo in the regex. Let me check the regex again:\n\nThe regex is written as //gi\n\nWait, the alt group is ([^\"']+), which requires at least one character. In the second example, the alt is present, so it should capture.\n\nWait, but in the code, the alt group is optional. The non-capturing group is (?:\\s+alt\\s*=\\s*[\"']([^\"']+)[\"'])? — the ? makes it optional. So if the alt is present, it's captured; if not, it's undefined.\n\nIn the second example, the alt is present, so match[2] should be the alt text.\n\nBut perhaps the second example's alt text has a trailing space inside the quotes, causing the regex to not capture it. But the user's example shows the alt as \"Protestors in London expressing their concern.\" without any trailing space.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the regex is not accounting for the fact that the alt attribute's value can contain escaped quotes. But the examples don't have that.\n\nAt this point, I think the regex should be adjusted to be more flexible, allowing attributes in any order and handling various spacing. Here's a revised regex approach:\n\nUse a regex that captures the entire opening tag, then parse the attributes using a more flexible method. For example:\n\nconst aiImageRegex = /]+)\\/?>/gi;\n\nThen, for each match, extract the attributes string and parse prompt and alt using another regex.\n\nBut that would require additional parsing. However, this approach allows for attributes in any order and handles various spacing.\n\nSo, modifying the regex to capture all attributes and then parse them separately might resolve the issue.\n\nIn the current code, the regex is:\n\n//gi\n\nThis requires the prompt to be the first attribute. If the second example's tag has attributes in a different order, it would fail. But in the user's examples, the order is correct.\n\nSince the user's second example isn't being matched, and the regex seems correct, perhaps there's a typo or a different issue in the actual code.\n\nAlternatively, perhaps the regex is missing the 'i' flag, but in the code, it's present (gi).\n\nAnother possibility is that the second example's prompt has a closing quote missing, but the user's example shows it correctly.\n\nGiven the time I've spent and the information available, I'll proceed to adjust the regex to be more permissive, allowing attributes in any order and handling various whitespace. This should cover cases where the order of prompt and alt is different or there are additional attributes.\n\n```script.js\n```\n","cursor","eyJpZCI6IjliN3hwdl9qZ282aDdqYmtpZGpuIn0","token","included",[184],{"_64":185,"_102":66,"_186":-5,"_187":55,"_188":55,"_189":55,"_190":97,"_191":97,"_192":97},"project_permissions","user_id","can_edit","can_delete","can_edit_members","can_view","can_list","can_participate","routes/browser/layout","actionData","errors"]