You've just demonstrated my first point. My second point explained why the regexp wouldn't work even in the absense of the behaviour. Less abstractly, I was tring to explain that matching the beginning of the string (^ when not under /m) is useless under </code>/g</code>.

Heh, that's a neat trick! First, delete the text a post refers to, and then offer an (unfalsifiable) interpretation of what that post is saying. Cool!