regex to negate from matched group - regex

I am trying to use regex to match anything but "id":digits part
I have come up with this "(\b(id":)(\d+)\b)" to find the id:byDigits pattern, but I need to negate that but haven't been able to get around it.
[{"age":1,"id":123,"value":"14"},
{"age":1,"id":4214,"value":"4324"},
{"age":3,"id":4244,"value":"545"}]
Any help is appreciated.

Simplest option is to capture the rest of the string into groups and use it in the substituion as below
Demo: https://regex101.com/r/cRVA5C/2/
Pattern: ^([\s\S]*?)\s*"id":\d+,?\s*([\s\S]*?)$
Breakdown:
([\s\S]*?): match any number of any characters before and after "id":. Capture it into groups \1 and \2
\s*"id":\d+,?\s*: match "id"=\d+, optionally preceded by spaces and optionally followed by spaces and ,.
In substituition, use \1\2, to get the desired output.
Note: Regex may not be the ideal tool for parsing JSON.

Related

Match a part of a string using regex

I have a string and would like to match a part of it.
The string is Accept: multipart/mixedPrivacy: nonePAI: <sip:4168755400#1.1.1.238>From: <sip:4168755400#1.1.1.238>;tag=5430960946837208_c1b08.2.3.1602135087396.0_1237422_3895152To: <sip:4168755400#1.1.1.238>
I want to match PAI: <sip:4168755400#
the whitespace can be a word so i would like to use .* but if i used that it matches most of the string
The example on that link is showing what i'm matching if i use the whitespace instead of .*
(PAI: <sip:)((?:\([2-9]\d{2}\)\ ?|[2-9]\d{2}(?:\-?|\ ?))[2-9]\d{2}[- ]?\d{4})#
The example on that link is showing what i'm trying to achieve with .* but it should only match PAI: <sip:4168755400#
(PAI:.*<sip:)((?:\([2-9]\d{2}\)\ ?|[2-9]\d{2}(?:\-?|\ ?))[2-9]\d{2}[- ]?\d{4})#
I tried lookaround but failing.
Any idea?
thanks
Matching the single space can be updated by using a character class matching either a space or a word character and repeat that 1 or more times to match at least a single occurrence.
Note that you don't have to escape the spaces, and in both occasions you can use an optional character class matching either a space or hyphen [ -]?
If you want the match only, you can omit the 2 capturing groups if you want to.
(PAI:[ \w]+<sip:)((?:\([2-9]\d{2}\) ?|[2-9]\d{2}[ -]?)[2-9]\d{2}[- ]?\d{4})#
Regex demo
The regex should be like
PAI:.*?(<sip:.*?#)
Explanation:
PAI:.*? find the word PAI: and after the word it can be anything (.*) but ? is used to indicate that it should match as few as possible before it found the next expression.
(<sip:.*?#) capturing group that we want the result.
<sip:.*?# find <sip: and after the word it can be anything .*? before it found #.
Example

Regex match every dot

I'd like to match every dot or comma but not in href attribute. So I have this regular expression:
^(?!.*?href=)(.*?)([.,])(\S+)
But it matches only the first occurrence. I think it because of non-greedy .*? But I can't come up with anything else. Can you help me, please?
What you might do to match every dot or comma and assuming that the attribute value is between single or double quotes is to match what you don't want and to capture in a group what you want to keep.
If you don't want to match a dot in the href you could match it with href=" followed by [^"]*" or '[^']*'. Then you could use an alternation | to capture in a group a dot or a comma using ([.,])
href=(?:"[^"]*"|'[^']*')|([.,])
If you want to match every occurrence, you will need to run the regex with the global (g) flag:
e.g.
/^(?!.*?href=)(.*?)([.,])(\S+)/g
I suggest you use a tool such as https://regex101.com/ to test and debug your regular expressions, it's super handy!

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 ").

Trying to figure out how to capture text between slashes regex

I have a regex
/([/<=][^/]*[/=?])$/g
I'm trying to capture text between the last slashes in a file path
/1/2/test/
but this regex matches "/test/" instead of just test. What am I doing wrong?
You need to use lookaround assertions.
(?<=\/)[^\/]*(?=\/[^\/]*$)
DEMO
or
Use the below regex and then grab the string you want from group index 1.
\/([^\/]*)\/[^\/]*$
The easy way
Match:
every character that is not a "/"
Get what was matched here. This is done by creating a backreference, ie: put inside parenthesis.
followed by "/" and then the end of string $
Code:
([^/]*)/$
Get the text in group(1)
Harder to read, only if you want to avoid groups
Match exactly the same as before, except now we're telling the regex engine not to consume characters when trying to match (2). This is done with a lookahead: (?= ).
Code:
[^/]*(?=/$)
Get what is returned by the match object.
The issue with your code is your opening and closing slashes are part of your capture group.
Demo
text: /1/2/test/
regex: /\/(\[^\/\]*?)(?=\/)/g
captures a list of three: "1", "2", "test"
The language you're using affects the results. For instance, JavaScript might not have certain lookarounds, or may actually capture something in a non-capture group. However, the above should work as intended. In PHP, all / match characters must be escaped (according to regex101.com), which is why the cleaner [/] wasn't used.
If you're only after the last match (i.e., test), you don't need the positive lookahead:
/\/([^\/]*?)\/$/

Non capturing group included in capture?

This text
"dhdhd89(dd)"
Matched against this regex
.+?(?:\()
..returns "dhdhd89(".
Why is the start parenthesis included in the capture?
Two different tools, as well as the .NET Regex class, returns the same result. So I gather there is something I don't understand about this.
The way I read my regex is.
Match any character, at least one occurrence. As few as possible.
The matched string should be followed by a start parenthesis, but not to be included in the capture.
I can find workaround, but I still want to know what is going on.
Just turn the non-capturing group to positive lookahead assertion.
.+?(?=\()
.+? non-greedy match of one or more characters followed by an opening parenthesis. Assertions won't match any characters but asserts whether a match is possible or not. But the non-capturing group will do the matching operation.
DEMO
You can just use this negation based regex to capture only text before a literal (:
^([^(]+)
When you use:
.+?(?:\()
Regex engine does match ( after initial text but it just doesn't return that in a captured group to you.
You havn't defined capture groups then I guess you display the whole match (group 0), you can do:
(.+?)(?:\()
and the string you want is in group 1
or use lookahead as #AvinashRaj said.