Generalized replacement by matching group id - regex

Given a string of the form <digit>-<non-digit> or <non-digit>-<digit>, I need to remove the hyphen (in Python). I.e. 2-f becomes 2f, f-2 becomes f2.
So far I have (?:\d-\D)|(?:\D-\d), which finds the patterns but I can't figure out a way to replace the hyphen with blank. In particular:
if I sub the regex above, it will replace the surrounding characters (because they are the ones matched);
I can do (?:(\d)-(\D))|(?:(\D)-(\d)) to expressly capture the characters and then sub with \1\2 will correctly process 2-f, turning it to 2f... but! it will fail f-2 of course because those characters are in the 3rd and 4th groups, so we'll need to sub with \3\4. Tried to give names to the group failed because all names need to be unique.
I know I can just run it through 2 sub statements, but is there a more elegant solution? I know regex is super-powerful if you know what you're doing... Thank you!

The alternative you could be using \1\2 in the replacement using the regex PyPi module in combination with a branch reset group (?| to be able to use the same group numbers with an alternation.
(?|(\d)-(\D)|(\D)-(\d))
Note that \D can also match a space or a newline. If you want to match a non whitespace char other than a digit, you could also use [^\s\d] instead of \D.
See a Python demo and regex demo.
For example:
import regex
pattern = r"(?|(\d)-(\D)|(\D)-(\d))"
s = "2-f or f-2"
print(regex.sub(pattern, r"\1\2", s))
Output
2f or f2

There is nothing that stops you from replacing with \1\2\3\4:
import re
text = "2-f becomes 2f, f-2 becomes f2"
print( re.sub(r"(\d)-(\D)|(\D)-(\d)", r"\1\2\3\4", text) )
See the regex demo and the Python demo.
This is possible because all backreferences pointing to groups that did not participate in the match are initialized with an empty string beginning with Python 3.5 (before, they were not and that caused issues, see Empty string instead of unmatched group error, and you would have to use a callable as a replacement argument).
Certainly, (?<=\d)-(?=\D)|(?<=\D)-(?=\d) regex, with positive lookarounds instead of capturing groups, looks much cleaner in the current scenario, but it will not work if the boundary patterns are of variable length.

Related

Regex Email validation with some special cases [duplicate]

I am trying to make a regex match which is discarding the lookahead completely.
\w+([-+.]\w+)*#\w+([-.]\w+)*\.\w+([-.]\w+)*
This is the match and this is my regex101 test.
But when an email starts with - or _ or . it should not match it completely, not just remove the initial symbols. Any ideas are welcome, I've been searching for the past half an hour, but can't figure out how to drop the entire email when it starts with those symbols.
You can use the word boundary near # with a negative lookbehind to check if we are at the beginning of a string or right after a whitespace, then check if the 1st symbol is not inside the unwanted class [^\s\-_.]:
(?<=^|\s)[^\s\-_.]\w*(?:[-+.]\w+)*\b#\w+(?:[-.]\w+)*\.\w+(?:[-.]\w+)*
See demo
List of matches:
support#github.com
s.miller#mit.edu
j.hopking#york.ac.uk
steve.parker#soft.de
info#company-hotels.org
kiki#hotmail.co.uk
no-reply#github.com
s.peterson#mail.uu.net
info-bg#software-software.software.academy
Additional notes on usage and alternative notation
Note that it is best practice to use as few escaped chars as possible in the regex, so, the [^\s\-_.] can be written as [^\s_.-], with the hyphen at the end of the character class still denoting a literal hyphen, not a range. Also, if you plan to use the pattern in other regex engines, you might find difficulties with the alternation in the lookbehind, and then you can replace (?<=\s|^) with the equivalent (?<!\S). See this regex:
(?<!\S)[^\s_.-]\w*(?:[-+.]\w+)*\b#\w+(?:[-.]\w+)*\.\w+(?:[-.]\w+)*
And last but not least, if you need to use it in JavaScript or other languages not supporting lookarounds, replace the (?<!\S)/(?<=\s|^) with a (non)capturing group (\s|^), wrap the whole email pattern part with another set of capturing parentheses and use the language means to grab Group 1 contents:
(\s|^)([^\s_.-]\w*(?:[-+.]\w+)*\b#\w+(?:[-.]\w+)*\.\w+(?:[-.]\w+)*)
See the regex demo.
I use this for multiple email addresses, separate with ‘;':
([A-Za-z0-9._%-]+#[A-Za-z0-9.-]+\.[A-Za-z]{2,4};)*
For a single mail:
[A-Za-z0-9._%-]+#[A-Za-z0-9.-]+\.[A-Za-z]{2,4}

Select Northings from a 1 Line String

I have the following string;
Start: 738392E, 6726376N
I extracted 738392 ok using (?<=.art\:\s)([0-9A-Z]*). This gave me a one group match allowing me to extract it as a column value
.
I want to extract 6726376 the same way. Have only one group appear because I am parsing that to a column value.
Not sure why is (?=(art\:\s\s*))(?=[,])*(.*[0-9]*) giving me the entire line after S.
Helping me get it right with an explanation will go along way.
Because you used positive lookaheads. Those just make some assertions, but don't "move the head along".
(?=(art\:\s\s*)) makes sure you're before "art: ...". The next thing is another positive lookahead that you quantify with a star to make it optional. Finally you match anything, so you get the rest of the line in your capture group.
I propose a simpler regex:
(?<=(art\:\s))(\d+)\D+(\d+)
Demo
First we make a positive lookback that makes sure we're after "art: ", then we match two numbers, seperated by non-numbers.
There is no need for you to make it this complicated. Just use something like
Start: (\d+)E, (\d+)N
or
\b\d+(?=[EN]\b)
if you need to match each bit separately.
Your expression (?=(art\:\s\s*))(?=[,])*(.*[0-9]*) has several problems besides the ones already mentioned: 1) your first and second lookahead match at different locations, 2) your second lookahead is quantified, which, in 25 years, I have never seen someone do, so kudos. ;), 3) your capturing group matches about anything, including any line or the empty string.
You match the whole part after it because you use .* which will match until the end of the line.
Note that this part [0-9]* at the end of the pattern does not match because it is optional and the preceding .* already matches until the end of the string.
You could get the match without any lookarounds:
(art:\s)(\d+)[^,]+,\s(\d+)
Regex demo
If you want the matches only, you could make use of the PyPi regex module
(?<=\bStart:(?:\s+\d+[A-Z],)* )\d+(?=[A-Z])
Regex demo (For example only, using a different engine) | Python demo

Strange regex behaviour, captures too greedy in complete regex, but correctly when tested alone [duplicate]

I need to capture multiple groups of the same pattern. Suppose, I have the following string:
HELLO,THERE,WORLD
And I've written the following pattern
^(?:([A-Z]+),?)+$
What I want it to do is to capture every single word, so that Group 1 is : "HELLO", Group 2 is "THERE" and Group 3 is "WORLD". What my regex is actually capturing is only the last one, which is "WORLD".
I'm testing my regular expression here and I want to use it with Swift (maybe there's a way in Swift to get intermediate results somehow, so that I can use them?)
UPDATE: I don't want to use split. I just need to now how to capture all the groups that match the pattern, not only the last one.
With one group in the pattern, you can only get one exact result in that group. If your capture group gets repeated by the pattern (you used the + quantifier on the surrounding non-capturing group), only the last value that matches it gets stored.
You have to use your language's regex implementation functions to find all matches of a pattern, then you would have to remove the anchors and the quantifier of the non-capturing group (and you could omit the non-capturing group itself as well).
Alternatively, expand your regex and let the pattern contain one capturing group per group you want to get in the result:
^([A-Z]+),([A-Z]+),([A-Z]+)$
The key distinction is repeating a captured group instead of capturing a repeated group.
As you have already found out, the difference is that repeating a captured group captures only the last iteration. Capturing a repeated group captures all iterations.
In PCRE (PHP):
((?:\w+)+),?
Match 1, Group 1. 0-5 HELLO
Match 2, Group 1. 6-11 THERE
Match 3, Group 1. 12-20 BRUTALLY
Match 4, Group 1. 21-26 CRUEL
Match 5, Group 1. 27-32 WORLD
Since all captures are in Group 1, you only need $1 for substitution.
I used the following general form of this regular expression:
((?:{{RE}})+)
Example at regex101
I think you need something like this....
b="HELLO,THERE,WORLD"
re.findall('[\w]+',b)
Which in Python3 will return
['HELLO', 'THERE', 'WORLD']
After reading Byte Commander's answer, I want to introduce a tiny possible improvement:
You can generate a regexp that will match either n words, as long as your n is predetermined. For instance, if I want to match between 1 and 3 words, the regexp:
^([A-Z]+)(?:,([A-Z]+))?(?:,([A-Z]+))?$
will match the next sentences, with one, two or three capturing groups.
HELLO,LITTLE,WORLD
HELLO,WORLD
HELLO
You can see a fully detailed explanation about this regular expression on Regex101.
As I said, it is pretty easy to generate this regexp for any groups you want using your favorite language. Since I'm not much of a swift guy, here's a ruby example:
def make_regexp(group_regexp, count: 3, delimiter: ",")
regexp_str = "^(#{group_regexp})"
(count - 1).times.each do
regexp_str += "(?:#{delimiter}(#{group_regexp}))?"
end
regexp_str += "$"
return regexp_str
end
puts make_regexp("[A-Z]+")
That being said, I'd suggest not using regular expression in that case, there are many other great tools from a simple split to some tokenization patterns depending on your needs. IMHO, a regular expression is not one of them. For instance in ruby I'd use something like str.split(",") or str.scan(/[A-Z]+/)
Just to provide additional example of paragraph 2 in the answer. I'm not sure how critical it is for you to get three groups in one match rather than three matches using one group. E.g., in groovy:
def subject = "HELLO,THERE,WORLD"
def pat = "([A-Z]+)"
def m = (subject =~ pat)
m.eachWithIndex{ g,i ->
println "Match #$i: ${g[1]}"
}
Match #0: HELLO
Match #1: THERE
Match #2: WORLD
The problem with the attempted code, as discussed, is that there is one capture group matching repeatedly so in the end only the last match can be kept.
Instead, instruct the regex to match (and capture) all pattern instances in the string, what can be done in any regex implementation (language). So come up with the regex pattern for this.
The defining property of the shown sample data is that the patterns of interest are separated by commas so we can match anything-but-a-comma, using a negated character class
[^,]+
and match (capture) globally, to get all matches in the string.
If your pattern need be more restrictive then adjust the exclusion list. For example, to capture words separated by any of the listed punctuation
[^,.!-]+
This extracts all words from hi,there-again!, without the punctuation. (The - itself should be given first or last in a character class, unless it's used in a range like a-z or 0-9.)
In Python
import re
string = "HELLO,THERE,WORLD"
pattern = r"([^,]+)"
matches = re.findall(pattern,string)
print(matches)
In Perl (and many other compatible systems)
use warnings;
use strict;
use feature 'say';
my $string = 'HELLO,THERE,WORLD';
my #matches = $string =~ /([^,]+)/g;
say "#matches";
(In this specific example the capturing () in fact aren't needed since we collect everything that is matched. But they don't hurt and in general they are needed.)
The approach above works as it stands for other patterns as well, including the one attempted in the question (as long as you remove the anchors which make it too specific). The most common one is to capture all words (usually meaning [a-zA-Z0-9_]), with the pattern \w+. Or, as in the question, get only the substrings of upper-case ascii letters[A-Z]+.
I know that my answer came late but it happens to me today and I solved it with the following approach:
^(([A-Z]+),)+([A-Z]+)$
So the first group (([A-Z]+),)+ will match all the repeated patterns except the final one ([A-Z]+) that will match the final one. and this will be dynamic no matter how many repeated groups in the string.
You actually have one capture group that will match multiple times. Not multiple capture groups.
javascript (js) solution:
let string = "HI,THERE,TOM";
let myRegexp = /([A-Z]+),?/g; // modify as you like
let match = myRegexp.exec(string); // js function, output described below
while (match != null) { // loops through matches
console.log(match[1]); // do whatever you want with each match
match = myRegexp.exec(string); // find next match
}
Syntax:
// matched text: match[0]
// match start: match.index
// capturing group n: match[n]
As you can see, this will work for any number of matches.
Sorry, not Swift, just a proof of concept in the closest language at hand.
// JavaScript POC. Output:
// Matches: ["GOODBYE","CRUEL","WORLD","IM","LEAVING","U","TODAY"]
let str = `GOODBYE,CRUEL,WORLD,IM,LEAVING,U,TODAY`
let matches = [];
function recurse(str, matches) {
let regex = /^((,?([A-Z]+))+)$/gm
let m
while ((m = regex.exec(str)) !== null) {
matches.unshift(m[3])
return str.replace(m[2], '')
}
return "bzzt!"
}
while ((str = recurse(str, matches)) != "bzzt!") ;
console.log("Matches: ", JSON.stringify(matches))
Note: If you were really going to use this, you would use the position of the match as given by the regex match function, not a string replace.
Design a regex that matches each particular element of the list rather then a list as a whole. Apply it with /g
Iterate throught the matches, cleaning them from any garbage such as list separators that got mixed in. You may require another regex, or you can get by with simple replace substring method.
The sample code is in JS, sorry :) The idea must be clear enough.
const string = 'HELLO,THERE,WORLD';
// First use following regex matches each of the list items separately:
const captureListElement = /^[^,]+|,\w+/g;
const matches = string.match(captureListElement);
// Some of the matches may include the separator, so we have to clean them:
const cleanMatches = matches.map(match => match.replace(',',''));
console.log(cleanMatches);
repeat the A-Z pattern in the group for the regular expression.
data="HELLO,THERE,WORLD"
pattern=r"([a-zA-Z]+)"
matches=re.findall(pattern,data)
print(matches)
output
['HELLO', 'THERE', 'WORLD']

regex match combined with something before a string if exists

I tried to get the sub-strings from a string
such like:
test strings:
cat_zoo_New_York_US
dog_zoo_South_Carolina
dolphin_zoo_Montreal_Canada
pokemon_home_d_K2-155
returned sub strings:
cat, New_York
dog, South_Carolina
dolphin, Montreal
pokemon, d
the Regex pattern I have tried is
([\w]+)(?:(_zoo_|_home_))(((?!(_US|_Canada|_K2-155))\w)+)
which I don't think is very concise and it returns other sub-strings besides what I need. Do you have any other suggestions?
Thanks!
Some updates
after #The fourth bird's answer #03/15/2018.
First of all, I like the idea of utilizing both ([^_]+) and the (?:) for different part of the sample strings.But let me extend a little more of the sample strings.
cat_zoo_New_York_US
dog_zoo_South_Carolina
yellow_dolphin_zoo_Montreal_Canada
pokemon_home_d_K2-155
pokemon_home_zoo_d_K2-155
I actually want to use the anchor strings such as 'zoo','home' or 'home_zoo' to separate the characters before and after, together with matching(and discarding) the last part of the country(or whatever specified place ID), which makes this question a bit less general(I like the idea of using _,but let me make it more tricky to learn better).
two questions here
what is the function of (?=) and .* here in
(?=(?:_US|_Canada|_K2-155|$)).*$? It seems if I use
(?:_US|_Canada|_K2-155|$), it is still ok...
since I extended a little bit on the anchor string to let it support
_, I used:
(.*?)(?:_*)(?:home_zoo|zoo|home)(?:_*)(.*?)(?:_*)(?:US|Canada|K2-155|$)
It seems ok, but if I use:
(.*?)(?:_*)(?:home|zoo|home_zoo)(?:_*)(.*?)(?:_*)(?:US|Canada|K2-155|$)
It will firstly match home for the last sample string. Is there a
greedy algorithm to catch this without specify the order of the pattern
string?
Well again, I don't like to make a long list of anchor strings, but I don't have other ideas make it more general without doing so.
Thanks again!
You could try it like this:
^([^_]+)_[^_]+_(.*?)(?=(?:_US|_Canada|_K2-155|$)).*$
This will capture 2 groups. You could for example use this in a replacement with group1, group2.
First capture the first part ending on an underscore in group 1 like cat_. Then match the second part ending with an underscore like zoo_ or home_.
From that point capture in a group until you encounter one of your values using a lookahead (?= or the end of the string.
That would match:
^ Begin of the string
([^_]+) Match in a capturing group not an _ one or more times (group 1)
_[^_]+_ match _ then not an _ one or more times followed by _
(.*?) Capture in a group any character zero or more times greedy (group 2)
(?= Positive lookahead that asserts what is on the right side is
(?: Non capturing group
_US|_Canada|_K2-155|$ your values or end of the string
) Close group
) Close group
.*$ Match any character zero or more times till the end of the string
Edit: After the updated question, perhaps this will suit your requirements:
^(.*?)_(?:home_zoo|zoo|home)(.*?)(?=(?:_US|_Canada|_K2-155|$))
This will match any charcter zero or more times non greedy (.*?), then an underscore and a non capturing group (?:home|zoo|home_zoo) to separate the characters before and after.
Well, I tried a more straightforward approach. If your data is more complex than the sample that you gave above, this may fail. Otherwise, for the above text, it works fine.
Here is the expression that I used:
^([^_]*)_[^_]*_(.*)_.*$
1 23 45 67
Basically what I did was:
Group the first char stream, which does not contain _, starting at the beginning of the line.
Then there is an _ following the above group
Follows an arbitrary length string, which does not have _'s in it
Then comes an _
Group the next arbitrary length string
Comes and _ afterwards
Rest of the string
replace it with \1, \2 (first group, second group).
You can find a fiddle here
If you are using vim, you can also achieve the same thing in vim with the following command:
:%s/^[^_]*_\([^_]*\)_\(.*\)_.*$/\1, \2/g
UPDATE
^([^_]*)_[^_]*_(((?:South_)|(?:New_))*[^_]*)((?:_US)|(?:_Canada)|(?:_K2-155))*$
You can find the new fiddle (here)[https://regex101.com/r/qQ2dE4/273]
What is the difference between this one and the previous one?
Now, I cheat a little, as such that I look for adjectives, which modify the state name, like South_ or New_. You can add more here, like East_, West_, Old_ or whatever if there is a case in your date.
There are cases where country is skipped in data. Plus looks like that last token on the very last line does not follow up a pattern. So, I explicitly listed those options in the expression, like US, Canada etc. You may need to add more exceptional cases in here as well.

Mixing Lookahead and Lookbehind in 1 Regexp

I'm trying to match first occurrence of window.location.replace("http://stackoverflow.com") in some HTML string.
Especially I want to capture the URL of the first window.location.replace entry in whole HTML string.
So for capturing URL I formulated this 2 rules:
it should be after this string: window.location.redirect("
it should be before this string ")
To achieve it I think I need to use lookbehind (for 1st rule) and lookahead (for 2nd rule).
I end up with this Regex:
.+(?<=window\.location\.redirect\(\"?=\"\))
It doesn't work. I'm not even sure that it legal to mix both rules like I did.
Can you please help me with translating my rules to Regex? Other ways of doing this (without lookahead(behind)) also appreciated.
The pattern you wrote is really not the one you need as it matches something very different from what you expect: text window.location.redirect("=") in text window.location.redirect("=") something. And it will only work in PCRE/Python if you remove the ? from before \" (as lookbehinds should be fixed-width in PCRE). It will work with ? in .NET regex.
If it is JS, you just cannot use a lookbehind as its regex engine does not support them.
Instead, use a capturing group around the unknown part you want to get:
/window\.location\.redirect\("([^"]*)"\)/
or
/window\.location\.redirect\("(.*?)"\)/
See the regex demo
No /g modifier will allow matching just one, first occurrence. Access the value you need inside Group 1.
The ([^"]*) captures 0+ characters other than a double quote (URLs you need should not have it). If these URLs you have contain a ", you should use the second approach as (.*?) will match any 0+ characters other than a newline up to the first ").