Hi can someone help me with the correct code for this statement because it is not working for me.
[[*id:isnot=`250` and isnot=`252`:then=`[[$qc-wrap]]`]]
A more performant syntax would be:
[[[[*id:isnot=`250`:or:isnot=`252`:then=`$qc-wrap`:else=``]]]]
Note: updated to reflect comment below. Include a hyphen in the else value, as this:
[[[[ ... :else=`-`]]]]
Also note: an empty else condition can be left off entirely.
I think using or rather than and is appropriate here.
This article is great for understanding MODX conditionals:
https://sepiariver.com/modx/modx-output-filters-if-phx-conditional-statements-tutorial/
And this one for understanding the syntax above and why it's more performant:
https://modx.com/blog/2012/09/14/tags-as-the-result-or-how-conditionals-are-like-mosquitoes/
You use wrong syntax, please fix as follows:
[[*id:isnot='250':and:isnot='252':then='[[$qc-wrap]]']]
Don't forget to replace ' with ` within this example
A simpler solution for this question is to use the :inarray output modifier to return an empty string, and use the :default output modifier to customize output for everything that doesn't match 250 or 252:
[[*id:inarray=`250,252`:then=``:default=`[[$qc-wrap]]`]]
Related
I want to get a clean number from a string like "123.45". On using of =TO_PURE_TEXT(C10) it doesn't work for me,
against an example from the documentation. An absolute referencing doesn't help.
But, if i use no cell referencing, but direct input, like =TO_PURE_TEXT("123.45") the input is correct, as expected without quotes.
Is it a kind of bug, or do i really do something wrong? How can i get this work with the cell referencing?
all you need is:
=SUBSTITUTE(C10, """", )*1
or:
=REGEXREPLACE(C10, """", )*1
I can't speak to whether it's a bug. Does seem odd, but this should work for now:
=1*SUBSTITUTE(C10,CHAR(34),"")
Please help me in extracting the string from this text like
id1:value1,id2:value2
id1:value1a,id2:value2a
from
"[{id1:value1,id2:value2},{id1:value1a,id2:value2a}]"
{([^}]+)} will find and capture anything that is inside { }
You should include more detail in your question though and show that you have made an attempt at it yourself.
Working codes
unlist(regmatches(text, gregexpr("\\{.*?\\}", text)))
unlist(regmatches(text, gregexpr("\\{([^}]+)\\}", text)))
My question may be a bit strange, but it's been bothering me since the behavior is not what I expected. Here is my query:
query = request.GET.get('q','')
#in search_indexes:
#start_datetime = indexes.DateTimeField(model_attr='start_datetime',null=True)
#end_datetime = indexes.DateTimeField(model_attr='end_datetime')
search_events = SearchQuerySet().models(Event).filter(content=query).
filter(end_datetime__gte=datetime.now()).
order_by("start_datetime")
Now I type in a query like "asdfasdfjasldf lolol hwtf asdlfka" and I still get 3 results. (Note, I only have 5 events to start with. Not sure if that could affect anything.) I print out the scores, and they are [42,42,42]. Doesn't filter() match on exact phrases? Especially if I use quotes?
//edit
I also tried using auto_query, and the results are the same.
I'm really confused about what's happening, so hopefully somebody can help clear this up. Thanks in advance!
Turns out that someone else on my team had set HAYSTACK_DEFAULT_OPERATOR to 'OR' instead of 'AND'. Explains everything - the additional filter tag was actually expanding the number of results!
You might like to perform search using auto_query():
search_events = SearchQuerySet().models(Event)
.auto_query(query)
.filter(end_datetime__gte=datetime.now())
.order_by("start_datetime")
It has some extra features, like for example exact query searching when phrase is enclosed in quotes.
I have a block of codes with timestamp in front of each line like this:
12/02/2010 12:20:12 function myFun()
12/02/2010 12:20:13 {....
The first column is a date time value. I would like to comment them out by using Vim, thus:
/*12/02/2010 12:20:12*/ function myFun()
/*12/02/2010 12:20:13*/ {....
I tried to search for date first:
/\d\d\/\d\d\/\d\d\d\d \d\d:\d\d:\d\d
I got all the timestamps marked correctly. However When I tried to replace them by the command:
%s/\d\d\/\d\d\/\d\d\d\d \d\d:\d\d:\d\d/\/*\d\d\/\d\d\/\d\d\d\d \d\d:\d\d:\d\d*\//
I got the following result:
/*dd/dd/dddd dd:dd:dd*/ function myFun()
/*dd/dd/dddd dd:dd:dd*/ {....
I think I need to name the search part and put them back in the replace part. How I can do it?
I suppose I would just do something like:
:%s-^../../.... ..:..:..-/* & */-
I would actually not us a regex to do this. It takes too long to enter the correct formatting. I would instead use a Visual Block. The sequence works out to be something like this.
<C-V>}I/* <ESC>
3f\s
<C-V>I */
I love regex, and don't want to knock the regex solutions, but find when doing things with pre-formatted blocks, that this is easier, and requires less of a diversion from the real task, which isn't figuring out how to write a regex.
%s/\d\d\/\d\d\/\d\d\d\d \d\d:\d\d:\d\d/\/*&*\//
:%s/^\([0-9/]* [0-9:]* \)\(.*\)/\/*\1*\/ \2/
I'm writing a Telnet client of sorts in C# and part of what I have to parse are ANSI/VT100 escape sequences, specifically, just those used for colour and formatting (detailed here).
One method I have is one to find all the codes and remove them, so I can render the text without any formatting if needed:
public static string StripStringFormating(string formattedString)
{
if (rTest.IsMatch(formattedString))
return rTest.Replace(formattedString, string.Empty);
else
return formattedString;
}
I'm new to regular expressions and I was suggested to use this:
static Regex rText = new Regex(#"\e\[[\d;]+m", RegexOptions.Compiled);
However, this failed if the escape code was incomplete due to an error on the server. So then this was suggested, but my friend warned it might be slower (this one also matches another condition (z) that I might come across later):
static Regex rTest =
new Regex(#"(\e(\[([\d;]*[mz]?))?)?", RegexOptions.Compiled);
This not only worked, but was in fact faster to and reduced the impact on my text rendering. Can someone explain to a regexp newbie, why? :)
Do you really want to do run the regexp twice? Without having checked (bad me) I would have thought that this would work well:
public static string StripStringFormating(string formattedString)
{
return rTest.Replace(formattedString, string.Empty);
}
If it does, you should see it run ~twice as fast...
The reason why #1 is slower is that [\d;]+ is a greedy quantifier. Using +? or *? is going to do lazy quantifing. See MSDN - Quantifiers for more info.
You may want to try:
"(\e\[(\d{1,2};)*?[mz]?)?"
That may be faster for you.
I'm not sure if this will help with what you are working on, but long ago I wrote a regular expression to parse ANSI graphic files.
(?s)(?:\e\[(?:(\d+);?)*([A-Za-z])(.*?))(?=\e\[|\z)
It will return each code and the text associated with it.
Input string:
<ESC>[1;32mThis is bright green.<ESC>[0m This is the default color.
Results:
[ [1, 32], m, This is bright green.]
[0, m, This is the default color.]
Without doing detailed analysis, I'd guess that it's faster because of the question marks. These allow the regular expression to be "lazy," and stop as soon as they have enough to match, rather than checking if the rest of the input matches.
I'm not entirely happy with this answer though, because this mostly applies to question marks after * or +. If I were more familiar with the input, it might make more sense to me.
(Also, for the code formatting, you can select all of your code and press Ctrl+K to have it add the four spaces required.)