I need a regex to match tokens for a syntax highlighter, which should match full words when surrounded by non-alphanumeric characters or string boundaries. The regex I initially came up with is:
(?<=[^\w]|^)TOKEN(?=[^\w]|$)
Where TOKEN is the token I'm searching for. This works in regex testers, but c++'s regex doesn't support lookbehinds. Omitting the lookbehind causes the regex to match the character before the token as well, which causes issues. I'm aware boost::regex supports lookbehinds, but I'd like to keep to std::regex if possible.
My question is: can I change my regex to exclude the character before the token from the match?
The pattern is missing a closing ] at the end, and \w also matches \d
You might use an alternation asserting either the start of the string, or a position where \b does not match and assert not a word char to the right.
(?:^|\B)TOKEN(?!\w)
Regex demo
After the update of the question, you can write (?<=[^\w]|^)TOKEN(?=[^\w]|$) as (?<=\W|^)TOKEN(?=\W|$) or in short without the lookbehind:
\bTOKEN(?!\w)
Related
Say I have the following strings:
PB-GD2185-11652-MTCH
GD2185-11652-MTCH
KD-GD2185-11652-MTCH
KD-GD2185-11652
I want REGEX.IsMatch to return true if the string has MTCH in it and does not start with PB.
I expected the regex to be the following:
^(?<!PB)\S+(?=MTCH)
but that gives me the following matches:
PB-GD2185-11652-
GD2185-11652-
KD-GD2185-11652-
I do not understand why the negative lookbehind not only doesn't exclude the match but includes the PB characters in the match. The positive lookahead works as expected.
EDIT 1
Let me start with a simpler example. The following regex matches all of the strings as I would expect it to:
\S+
The following regex still matches all of the strings even though I would expect it not to:
\S+(?!MTCH)
The following regex matches all but the final H character on the first three strings:
\S+(?<!MTCH)
From the documentation at regex 101, a lookahead looks for text to the right of the pattern and a lookbehind looks for text to the left of the pattern, so having a lookahead at the beginning of a string does not jive with the documentation.
Edit 2
take another example with the following three strings:
grey
greyhound
hound
the regex:
^(?<!grey)hound
only matches the final hound. whereas the regex:
^(?<!grey)\S+
matches all three.
You need a lookahead: ^(?!PB)\S+(?=MTCH). Using the look-behind means the PB has to come before the first character.
The problem was because of the greediness of \S+. When dealing with lookarounds and greedy quantifiers you can easily match more characters than you expect. One way to deal with this is to insert a negative lookaround in a group with the greedy quantifier to exclude it as a match as stated in this question:
How to non-greedy multiple lookbehind matches
and on this helpful website about greediness in regular expressions:
http://www.rexegg.com/regex-quantifiers.html
Note that this second link has a few other ways to deal with the greediness in various situations.
A good regular expression for this situation is as follows:
^(?<!PB)((?!PB)\S+)(MTCH)
In situations like this it is going to be much clearer to do it logically within the code. So first check if the string matches MTCH and then that it doesn't match ^PB
this has been asked so many times - yet I don't get why the following negative look-behind still matches after the comment character ";" ?!
(?<!;).+mylib.*
Debuggex Demo
TEST-TEXT:
; /home/mylib/blabla/laydef1.rul (matches wrongly!?)
/home/mylib/blabla/laydef2.rul (matches as it should)
P.S. RegEx class is PCRE
Since PCRE doesn't support variable length lookbehind you can use this regex construct:
/^\h*(?:;.*(*SKIP)(*F)|.*mylib.*)/m
RegEx Demo
Your regex: (?<!;).+mylib.* fails because .+ matches everything from ; tomylib`
(*FAIL) behaves like a failing negative assertion and is a synonym for (?!)
(*SKIP) defines a point beyond which the regex engine is not allowed to backtrack when the subpattern fails later
(*SKIP)(*FAIL) together provide a nice alternative of restriction that you cannot have a variable length lookbehind in above regex.
I am trying to match terms such as the Dutch ge-berg-te. berg is a noun by itself, and ge...te is a circumfix, i.e. geberg does not exist, nor does bergte. gebergte does. What I want is a RegEx that matches berg or gebergte, working with a lookaround. I was thinking this would work
\b(?i)(ge(?=te))?berg(te)?\b
But it doesn't. I am guessing because a lookahead only checks the immediate following characters, and not across characters. Is there any way to match characters with a lookahead withouth the constraint that those characters have to be immediately behind the others?
Valid matches would be:
Berg
berg
Gebergte
gebergte
Invalid matches could be:
Geberg
geberg
Bergte
bergte
ge-/Ge- and -te always have to occur together. Note that I want to try this with a lookahead. I know it can be done simpler, but I want to see if its methodologically possible to do something like this.
Here is one non-lookaround based regex:
\b(berg|gebergte)\b
Use it with i (ignore case) flag. This regex uses alternation and word boundary to search for complete words berg OR gebergte.
RegEx Demo
Lookaround based regex:
(?<=\bge)berg(?=te\b)|\bberg\b
This regex used a lookahead and lookbehind to search for berg preceded by ge and followed by te. Alternatively it matches complete word berg using word boundary asserter \b which is also 0-width asserter like anchors ^ and $.
To generally forbid a sign, you can put the negative lookaround to the beginning of a string and combine it with random number of other signs before the string you want to forbid:
regex: don't match if containing a specific string
^(?!.\*720).*
This will not match, if the string contains 720, but else match everything else.
I want to find the number of occurrences of a certain string in a text. The string can match the beginning of a sentence or at the end before the '.'. So I thought of:
\bMY_STRING\b
However, i do not want to match parts of an email address. That is, the string should not be next to the # (at-sign, at-symbol, ampersat, apetail, arroba, atmark, at symbol, commercial at, monkey tail or whatever term makes it easier to find this using a search engine).
So, 'example' should not be counted in 'test#example.com'.
What should replace the \b in my expression to match wordbreaks, except at #?
If your regex flavors knows lookbehind assertions (most do, but JavaScript and Ruby 1.8 only support lookahead), you can replace all \bs with this:
(?<!#)\b(?!#)
This matches a word boundary only if it's not before or after a #.
I think you can use the lookbehind and lookahead options in regex:
#\b(?<![#])YOUR_TEXT(?![#])\b)#
Example
You can use:
[^\#]
which means: match any character except #
I have a regex, for example (ma|(t){1}). It matches ma and t and doesn't match bla.
I want to negate the regex, thus it must match bla and not ma and t, by adding something to this regex. I know I can write bla, the actual regex is however more complex.
Use negative lookaround: (?!pattern)
Positive lookarounds can be used to assert that a pattern matches. Negative lookarounds is the opposite: it's used to assert that a pattern DOES NOT match. Some flavor supports assertions; some puts limitations on lookbehind, etc.
Links to regular-expressions.info
Lookahead and Lookbehind Zero-Width Assertions
Flavor comparison
See also
How do I convert CamelCase into human-readable names in Java?
Regex for all strings not containing a string?
A regex to match a substring that isn’t followed by a certain other substring.
More examples
These are attempts to come up with regex solutions to toy problems as exercises; they should be educational if you're trying to learn the various ways you can use lookarounds (nesting them, using them to capture, etc):
codingBat plusOut using regex
codingBat repeatEnd using regex
codingbat wordEnds using regex
Assuming you only want to disallow strings that match the regex completely (i.e., mmbla is okay, but mm isn't), this is what you want:
^(?!(?:m{2}|t)$).*$
(?!(?:m{2}|t)$) is a negative lookahead; it says "starting from the current position, the next few characters are not mm or t, followed by the end of the string." The start anchor (^) at the beginning ensures that the lookahead is applied at the beginning of the string. If that succeeds, the .* goes ahead and consumes the string.
FYI, if you're using Java's matches() method, you don't really need the the ^ and the final $, but they don't do any harm. The $ inside the lookahead is required, though.
\b(?=\w)(?!(ma|(t){1}))\b(\w*)
this is for the given regex.
the \b is to find word boundary.
the positive look ahead (?=\w) is here to avoid spaces.
the negative look ahead over the original regex is to prevent matches of it.
and finally the (\w*) is to catch all the words that are left.
the group that will hold the words is group 3.
the simple (?!pattern) will not work as any sub-string will match
the simple ^(?!(?:m{2}|t)$).*$ will not work as it's granularity is full lines
This regexp math your condition:
^.*(?<!ma|t)$
Look at how it works:
https://regex101.com/r/Ryg2FX/1
Apply this if you use laravel.
Laravel has a not_regex where field under validation must not match the given regular expression; uses the PHP preg_match function internally.
'email' => 'not_regex:/^.+$/i'