We can check to see if a digit is in a password, for example, by doing something like:
(?=.*\d)
Or if there's a digit and lowercase with:
(?=.*\d)(?=.*[a-z])
This will basically go on "until the end" to check whether there's a letter in the string.
However, I was wondering if it's possible in some sort of generic way to limit the scope of a lookahead. Here's a basic example which I'm hoping will demonstrate the point:
start_of_string;
middle_of_string;
end_of_string;
I want to use a single regular expression to match against start_of_string + middle_of_string + end_of_string.
Is it possible to use a lookahead/lookbehind in the middle_of_string section WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT COMES BEFORE OR AFTER IT? That is, not knowing the size or contents of the preceding/succeeding string component. And limit the scope of the lookahead to only what is contained in that portion of the string?
Let's take one example:
start_of_string = 'start'
middle_of_string = '123'
end_of_string = 'ABC'
Would it be possible to check the contents of each part but limit it's scope like this?
string = 'start123ABC'
# Check to make sure the first part has a letter, the second part has a number and the third part has a capital
((?=.*[a-z]).*) # limit scope to the first part only!!
((?=.*[0-9]).*) # limit scope to only the second part.
((?=.*[A-Z]).*) # limit scope to only the last part.
In other words, can lookaheads/lookbehinds be "chained" with other components of a regex without it screwing up the entire regex?
UPDATE:
Here would be an example, hopefully this is more helpful to the question:
START_OF_STRING = 'abc'
Does 'x' exist in it? (?=.*x) ==> False
END_OF_STRING = 'cdxoy'
Does 'y' exist in it? (?=.*y) ==> True
FULL_STRING = START_OF_STRING + END_OF_STRING
'abcdxoy'
Is it possible to chain the two regexes together in any sort of way to only wok on its 'substring' component?
For example, now (?=.*x) in the first part of the string would return True, but it should not.
`((?=.*x)(?=.*y)).*`
I think the short answer to this is "No, it's not possible.", but am looking to hear from someone who understands this to tell why it is or isn't.
In .NET and javascript you could use a positive lookahead at the start of your string component and a negative lookbehind at the end of it to "constrain" the match. Example:
.*(?=.*arrow)(?<middle>.*)(?<=.*arrow).*
helloarrowxyz
{'middle': 'arrow'}
If in pcre, python, or other you would need to either have a fixed width lookahead to constraint it from going too far forward, such as what Wiktor Stribiżew says above:
.*(?=.{0,5}arrow)(?<middle>.{0,5}).*
Otherwise, it wouldn't be possible to do without either a fixed-width lookahead or a variable width look-behind.
Related
So I had this code working for a few months already, lets say I have a table called Categories, which has a string column called name, so I receive a string and I want to know if any category was mentioned (a mention occur when the string contains the substring: #name_of_a_category), the approach I follow for this was something like below:
categories.select { |category_i| content_received.downcase.match(/##{category_i.downcase}/)}
That worked pretty well until today suddenly started to receive an exception unmatched close parenthesis, I realized that the categories names can contain special chars so I decided to not consider special chars or spaces anymore (don't want to add restrictions to the user and at the same time don't want to deal with those cases so the policy is just to ignore it).
So the question is there a clean way of removing these special chars (maintaining the #) and matching the string (don't want to modify the data just ignore it while looking for mentions)?
You can also use
prep_content_received = content_received.gsub(/[^\w\s]|_/,'')
p categories.select { |c|
prep_content_received.match?(/\b#{c.gsub(/[^\w\s]|_/, '').strip()}\b/i)
}
See the Ruby demo
Details:
The prep_content_received = content_received.gsub(/[^\w\s]|_/,'') creates a copy of content_received with no special chars and _. Using it once reduced overhead if there are a lot of categories
Then, you iterate over the categories list, and each time check if the prep_content_received matches \b (word boundary) + category with all special chars, _ and leading/trailing whitespace stripped from it + \b in a case insensitive way (see the /i flag, no need to .downcase).
So after looking around I found some answers on the platform but nothing with my specific requirements (maybe I missed something, if so please let me know), and this is how I fix it for my case:
content_received = 'pepe is watching a #comedy :)'
categories = ['comedy :)', 'terror']
temp_content = content_received.downcase
categories.select { |category_i| temp_content.gsub(/[^\sa-zA-Z0-9]/, '#' => '#').match?(/##{category_i.downcase.
gsub(/[^\sa-zA-Z0-9]/, '')}/) }
For the sake of the example, I reduced the categories to a simple array of strings, basically the first gsub, remove any character that is not a letter or a number (any special character) and replace each # with an #, the second gsub is a simpler version of the first one.
You can test the snippet above here
Let's say I have a string of 2 characters. Using regex (as a thought exercise), I want to accept it only if the first character has an ascii value bigger than that of the second character.
ae should not match because a is before e in the the ascii table.
ea, za and aA should match for the opposite reason
f$ should match because $ is before letters in the ascii table.
It doesn't matter if aa or a matches or not, I'm only interested in the base case. Any flavor of regex is allowed.
Can it be done ? What if we restrict the problem to lowercase letters only ? What if we restrict it to [abc] only ? What if we invert the condition (accept when the characters are ordered from smallest to biggest) ? What if I want it to work for N characters instead of 2 ?
I guess that'd be almost impossible for me to do it then, however bobble-bubble impressively solved the problem with:
^~*\}*\|*\{*z*y*x*w*v*u*t*s*r*q*p*o*n*m*l*k*j*i*h*g*f*e*d*c*b*a*`*_*\^*\]*\\*\[*Z*Y*X*W*V*U*T*S*R*Q*P*O*N*M*L*K*J*I*H*G*F*E*D*C*B*A*#*\?*\>*\=*\<*;*\:*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2*1*0*\/*\.*\-*,*\+*\**\)*\(*'*&*%*\$*\#*"*\!*$(?!^)
bobble bubble RegEx Demo
Maybe for abc only or some short sequences we would approach solving the problem with some expression similar to,
^(abc|ab|ac|bc|a|b|c)$
^(?:abc|ab|ac|bc|a|b|c)$
that might help you to see how you would go about it.
RegEx Demo 1
You can simplify that to:
^(a?b?c?)$
^(?:a?b?c?)$
RegEx Demo 2
but I'm not so sure about it.
The number of chars you're trying to allow is irrelevant to the problem you are trying to solve:
because you can simply add an independent statement, if you will, for that, such as with:
(?!.{n})
where n-1 would be the number of chars allowed, which in this case would be
(?!.{3})^(?:a?b?c?)$
(?!.{3})^(a?b?c?)$
RegEx Demo 3
A regex is not the best tool for the job.
But it's doable. A naive approach is to enumerate all the printable ascii characters and their corresponding lower range:
\x21[ -\x20]|\x22[ -\x21]|\x23[ -\x22]|\x24[ -\x23]|\x25[ -\x24]|\x26[ -\x25]|\x27[ -\x26]|\x28[ -\x27]|\x29[ -\x28]|\x2a[ -\x29]|\x2b[ -\x2a]|\x2c[ -\x2b]|\x2d[ -\x2c]|\x2e[ -\x2d]|\x2f[ -\x2e]|\x30[ -\x2f]|\x31[ -\x30]|\x32[ -\x31]|\x33[ -\x32]|\x34[ -\x33]|\x35[ -\x34]|\x36[ -\x35]|\x37[ -\x36]|\x38[ -\x37]|\x39[ -\x38]|\x3a[ -\x39]|\x3b[ -\x3a]|\x3c[ -\x3b]|\x3d[ -\x3c]|\x3e[ -\x3d]|\x3f[ -\x3e]|\x40[ -\x3f]|\x41[ -\x40]|\x42[ -\x41]|\x43[ -\x42]|\x44[ -\x43]|\x45[ -\x44]|\x46[ -\x45]|\x47[ -\x46]|\x48[ -\x47]|\x49[ -\x48]|\x4a[ -\x49]|\x4b[ -\x4a]|\x4c[ -\x4b]|\x4d[ -\x4c]|\x4e[ -\x4d]|\x4f[ -\x4e]|\x50[ -\x4f]|\x51[ -\x50]|\x52[ -\x51]|\x53[ -\x52]|\x54[ -\x53]|\x55[ -\x54]|\x56[ -\x55]|\x57[ -\x56]|\x58[ -\x57]|\x59[ -\x58]|\x5a[ -\x59]|\x5b[ -\x5a]|\x5c[ -\x5b]|\x5d[ -\x5c]|\x5e[ -\x5d]|\x5f[ -\x5e]|\x60[ -\x5f]|\x61[ -\x60]|\x62[ -\x61]|\x63[ -\x62]|\x64[ -\x63]|\x65[ -\x64]|\x66[ -\x65]|\x67[ -\x66]|\x68[ -\x67]|\x69[ -\x68]|\x6a[ -\x69]|\x6b[ -\x6a]|\x6c[ -\x6b]|\x6d[ -\x6c]|\x6e[ -\x6d]|\x6f[ -\x6e]|\x70[ -\x6f]|\x71[ -\x70]|\x72[ -\x71]|\x73[ -\x72]|\x74[ -\x73]|\x75[ -\x74]|\x76[ -\x75]|\x77[ -\x76]|\x78[ -\x77]|\x79[ -\x78]|\x7a[ -\x79]|\x7b[ -\x7a]|\x7c[ -\x7b]|\x7d[ -\x7c]|\x7e[ -\x7d]|\x7f[ -\x7e]
Try it online!
A (better) alternative is to enumerate the ascii characters in reverse order and use the ^ and $ anchors to assert there is nothing else unmatched. This should work for any string length:
^\x7f?\x7e?\x7d?\x7c?\x7b?z?y?x?w?v?u?t?s?r?q?p?o?n?m?l?k?j?i?h?g?f?e?d?c?b?a?`?\x5f?\x5e?\x5d?\x5c?\x5b?Z?Y?X?W?V?U?T?S?R?Q?P?O?N?M?L?K?J?I?H?G?F?E?D?C?B?A?#?\x3f?\x3e?\x3d?\x3c?\x3b?\x3a?9?8?7?6?5?4?3?2?1?0?\x2f?\x2e?\x2d?\x2c?\x2b?\x2a?\x29?\x28?\x27?\x26?\x25?\x24?\x23?\x22?\x21?\x20?$
Try it online!
You may replace ? with * if you want to allow duplicate characters.
ps: some people can come up with absurdly long regexes when they aren't the right tool for the job: to parse email, html or the present question.
I had this question a couple of times before, and I still couldn't find a good answer..
In my current problem, I have a console program output (string) that looks like this:
Number of assemblies processed = 1200
Number of assemblies uninstalled = 1197
Number of failures = 3
Now I want to extract those numbers and to check if there were failures. (That's a gacutil.exe output, btw.) In other words, I want to match any number [0-9]+ in the string that is preceded by 'failures = '.
How would I do that? I want to get the number only. Of course I can match the whole thing like /failures = [0-9]+/ .. and then trim the first characters with length("failures = ") or something like that. The point is, I don't want to do that, it's a lame workaround.
Because it's odd; if my pattern-to-match-but-not-into-output ("failures = ") comes after the thing i want to extract ([0-9]+), there is a way to do it:
pattern(?=expression)
To show the absurdity of this, if the whole file was processed backwards, I could use:
[0-9]+(?= = seruliaf)
... so, is there no forward-way? :T
pattern(?=expression) is a regex positive lookahead and what you are looking for is a regex positive lookbehind that goes like this (?<=expression)pattern but this feature is not supported by all flavors of regex. It depends which language you are using.
more infos at regular-expressions.info for comparison of Lookaround feature scroll down 2/3 on this page.
If your console output does actually look like that throughout, try splitting the string on "=" when the word "failure" is found, then get the last element (or the 2nd element). You did not say what your language is, but any decent language with string splitting capability would do the job. For example
gacutil.exe.... | ruby -F"=" -ane "print $F[-1] if /failure/"
How do I specify that there are several options for a string in a search?
For example, I want to find any combination that start with either jspPar, btn or jspAtt that ends with the letter K.
Also - I need to replace it with a string depending on the original prefix.
for example, if the prefix was jspPar I need to replace it with the letter P. (and, let's say, B and A for btn and jspAtt accordingaly).
Is
\(jsPar\|btn\|jspAtt\)[^ \t]*K
what you are looking for?
The \(jsPar\|btn\|jspAtt\) says “at this point, match any of these alternatives”, then [^ \t]* says “at this point, match any amount (incl. zero) of space or tab characters”, and K of course means “at this point match a K”.
For your added question could do something like this:
%s/\(jsPar\|btn\|jspAtt\)[^ \t]*\zsK/\=submatch(1) == 'jsPar' ? 'P' : submatch(1) == 'btn' ? 'B' : 'A' /g
(The \zs says “consider the match to have started at this point” so only the “K” will be replaced.)
But I would only do that if I had to do the substitution in a single pass. Otherwise I’d just run three s///s:
%s/jspAtt[^ \t]*\zsK/A/g
%s/jsPar[^ \t]*\zsK/P/g
%s/btn[^ \t]*\zsK/B/g
Given command history, that’s much less typing, and is also very unlikely to require debugging, whereas that’s always a potentiality when specifying any computation.
Is it possible to write a regular expression that matches all strings that does not only contain numbers? If we have these strings:
abc
a4c
4bc
ab4
123
It should match the four first, but not the last one. I have tried fiddling around in RegexBuddy with lookaheads and stuff, but I can't seem to figure it out.
(?!^\d+$)^.+$
This says lookahead for lines that do not contain all digits and match the entire line.
Unless I am missing something, I think the most concise regex is...
/\D/
...or in other words, is there a not-digit in the string?
jjnguy had it correct (if slightly redundant) in an earlier revision.
.*?[^0-9].*
#Chad, your regex,
\b.*[a-zA-Z]+.*\b
should probably allow for non letters (eg, punctuation) even though Svish's examples didn't include one. Svish's primary requirement was: not all be digits.
\b.*[^0-9]+.*\b
Then, you don't need the + in there since all you need is to guarantee 1 non-digit is in there (more might be in there as covered by the .* on the ends).
\b.*[^0-9].*\b
Next, you can do away with the \b on either end since these are unnecessary constraints (invoking reference to alphanum and _).
.*[^0-9].*
Finally, note that this last regex shows that the problem can be solved with just the basics, those basics which have existed for decades (eg, no need for the look-ahead feature). In English, the question was logically equivalent to simply asking that 1 counter-example character be found within a string.
We can test this regex in a browser by copying the following into the location bar, replacing the string "6576576i7567" with whatever you want to test.
javascript:alert(new String("6576576i7567").match(".*[^0-9].*"));
/^\d*[a-z][a-z\d]*$/
Or, case insensitive version:
/^\d*[a-z][a-z\d]*$/i
May be a digit at the beginning, then at least one letter, then letters or digits
Try this:
/^.*\D+.*$/
It returns true if there is any simbol, that is not a number. Works fine with all languages.
Since you said "match", not just validate, the following regex will match correctly
\b.*[a-zA-Z]+.*\b
Passing Tests:
abc
a4c
4bc
ab4
1b1
11b
b11
Failing Tests:
123
if you are trying to match worlds that have at least one letter but they are formed by numbers and letters (or just letters), this is what I have used:
(\d*[a-zA-Z]+\d*)+
If we want to restrict valid characters so that string can be made from a limited set of characters, try this:
(?!^\d+$)^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]{3,}$
or
(?!^\d+$)^[\w-]{3,}$
/\w+/:
Matches any letter, number or underscore. any word character
.*[^0-9]{1,}.*
Works fine for us.
We want to use the used answer, but it's not working within YANG model.
And the one I provided here is easy to understand and it's clear:
start and end could be any chars, but, but there must be at least one NON NUMERICAL characters, which is greatest.
I am using /^[0-9]*$/gm in my JavaScript code to see if string is only numbers. If yes then it should fail otherwise it will return the string.
Below is working code snippet with test cases:
function isValidURL(string) {
var res = string.match(/^[0-9]*$/gm);
if (res == null)
return string;
else
return "fail";
};
var testCase1 = "abc";
console.log(isValidURL(testCase1)); // abc
var testCase2 = "a4c";
console.log(isValidURL(testCase2)); // a4c
var testCase3 = "4bc";
console.log(isValidURL(testCase3)); // 4bc
var testCase4 = "ab4";
console.log(isValidURL(testCase4)); // ab4
var testCase5 = "123"; // fail here
console.log(isValidURL(testCase5));
I had to do something similar in MySQL and the following whilst over simplified seems to have worked for me:
where fieldname regexp ^[a-zA-Z0-9]+$
and fieldname NOT REGEXP ^[0-9]+$
This shows all fields that are alphabetical and alphanumeric but any fields that are just numeric are hidden. This seems to work.
example:
name1 - Displayed
name - Displayed
name2 - Displayed
name3 - Displayed
name4 - Displayed
n4ame - Displayed
324234234 - Not Displayed