Related
Obviously, you can use the | (pipe?) to represent OR, but is there a way to represent AND as well?
Specifically, I'd like to match paragraphs of text that contain ALL of a certain phrase, but in no particular order.
Use a non-consuming regular expression.
The typical (i.e. Perl/Java) notation is:
(?=expr)
This means "match expr but after that continue matching at the original match-point."
You can do as many of these as you want, and this will be an "and." Example:
(?=match this expression)(?=match this too)(?=oh, and this)
You can even add capture groups inside the non-consuming expressions if you need to save some of the data therein.
You need to use lookahead as some of the other responders have said, but the lookahead has to account for other characters between its target word and the current match position. For example:
(?=.*word1)(?=.*word2)(?=.*word3)
The .* in the first lookahead lets it match however many characters it needs to before it gets to "word1". Then the match position is reset and the second lookahead seeks out "word2". Reset again, and the final part matches "word3"; since it's the last word you're checking for, it isn't necessary that it be in a lookahead, but it doesn't hurt.
In order to match a whole paragraph, you need to anchor the regex at both ends and add a final .* to consume the remaining characters. Using Perl-style notation, that would be:
/^(?=.*word1)(?=.*word2)(?=.*word3).*$/m
The 'm' modifier is for multline mode; it lets the ^ and $ match at paragraph boundaries ("line boundaries" in regex-speak). It's essential in this case that you not use the 's' modifier, which lets the dot metacharacter match newlines as well as all other characters.
Finally, you want to make sure you're matching whole words and not just fragments of longer words, so you need to add word boundaries:
/^(?=.*\bword1\b)(?=.*\bword2\b)(?=.*\bword3\b).*$/m
Look at this example:
We have 2 regexps A and B and we want to match both of them, so in pseudo-code it looks like this:
pattern = "/A AND B/"
It can be written without using the AND operator like this:
pattern = "/NOT (NOT A OR NOT B)/"
in PCRE:
"/(^(^A|^B))/"
regexp_match(pattern,data)
The AND operator is implicit in the RegExp syntax.
The OR operator has instead to be specified with a pipe.
The following RegExp:
var re = /ab/;
means the letter a AND the letter b.
It also works with groups:
var re = /(co)(de)/;
it means the group co AND the group de.
Replacing the (implicit) AND with an OR would require the following lines:
var re = /a|b/;
var re = /(co)|(de)/;
You can do that with a regular expression but probably you'll want to some else. For example use several regexp and combine them in a if clause.
You can enumerate all possible permutations with a standard regexp, like this (matches a, b and c in any order):
(abc)|(bca)|(acb)|(bac)|(cab)|(cba)
However, this makes a very long and probably inefficient regexp, if you have more than couple terms.
If you are using some extended regexp version, like Perl's or Java's, they have better ways to do this. Other answers have suggested using positive lookahead operation.
Is it not possible in your case to do the AND on several matching results? in pseudocode
regexp_match(pattern1, data) && regexp_match(pattern2, data) && ...
Why not use awk?
with awk regex AND, OR matters is so simple
awk '/WORD1/ && /WORD2/ && /WORD3/' myfile
The order is always implied in the structure of the regular expression. To accomplish what you want, you'll have to match the input string multiple times against different expressions.
What you want to do is not possible with a single regexp.
If you use Perl regular expressions, you can use positive lookahead:
For example
(?=[1-9][0-9]{2})[0-9]*[05]\b
would be numbers greater than 100 and divisible by 5
In addition to the accepted answer
I will provide you with some practical examples that will get things more clear to some of You. For example lets say we have those three lines of text:
[12/Oct/2015:00:37:29 +0200] // only this + will get selected
[12/Oct/2015:00:37:x9 +0200]
[12/Oct/2015:00:37:29 +020x]
See demo here DEMO
What we want to do here is to select the + sign but only if it's after two numbers with a space and if it's before four numbers. Those are the only constraints. We would use this regular expression to achieve it:
'~(?<=\d{2} )\+(?=\d{4})~g'
Note if you separate the expression it will give you different results.
Or perhaps you want to select some text between tags... but not the tags! Then you could use:
'~(?<=<p>).*?(?=<\/p>)~g'
for this text:
<p>Hello !</p> <p>I wont select tags! Only text with in</p>
See demo here DEMO
You could pipe your output to another regex. Using grep, you could do this:
grep A | grep B
((yes).*(no))|((no).*(yes))
Will match sentence having both yes and no at the same time, regardless the order in which they appear:
Do i like cookies? **Yes**, i do. But milk - **no**, definitely no.
**No**, you may not have my phone. **Yes**, you may go f yourself.
Will both match, ignoring case.
Use AND outside the regular expression. In PHP lookahead operator did not not seem to work for me, instead I used this
if( preg_match("/^.{3,}$/",$pass1) && !preg_match("/\s{1}/",$pass1))
return true;
else
return false;
The above regex will match if the password length is 3 characters or more and there are no spaces in the password.
Here is a possible "form" for "and" operator:
Take the following regex for an example:
If we want to match words without the "e" character, we could do this:
/\b[^\We]+\b/g
\W means NOT a "word" character.
^\W means a "word" character.
[^\We] means a "word" character, but not an "e".
see it in action: word without e
"and" Operator for Regular Expressions
I think this pattern can be used as an "and" operator for regular expressions.
In general, if:
A = not a
B = not b
then:
[^AB] = not(A or B)
= not(A) and not(B)
= a and b
Difference Set
So, if we want to implement the concept of difference set in regular expressions, we could do this:
a - b = a and not(b)
= a and B
= [^Ab]
Obviously, you can use the | (pipe?) to represent OR, but is there a way to represent AND as well?
Specifically, I'd like to match paragraphs of text that contain ALL of a certain phrase, but in no particular order.
Use a non-consuming regular expression.
The typical (i.e. Perl/Java) notation is:
(?=expr)
This means "match expr but after that continue matching at the original match-point."
You can do as many of these as you want, and this will be an "and." Example:
(?=match this expression)(?=match this too)(?=oh, and this)
You can even add capture groups inside the non-consuming expressions if you need to save some of the data therein.
You need to use lookahead as some of the other responders have said, but the lookahead has to account for other characters between its target word and the current match position. For example:
(?=.*word1)(?=.*word2)(?=.*word3)
The .* in the first lookahead lets it match however many characters it needs to before it gets to "word1". Then the match position is reset and the second lookahead seeks out "word2". Reset again, and the final part matches "word3"; since it's the last word you're checking for, it isn't necessary that it be in a lookahead, but it doesn't hurt.
In order to match a whole paragraph, you need to anchor the regex at both ends and add a final .* to consume the remaining characters. Using Perl-style notation, that would be:
/^(?=.*word1)(?=.*word2)(?=.*word3).*$/m
The 'm' modifier is for multline mode; it lets the ^ and $ match at paragraph boundaries ("line boundaries" in regex-speak). It's essential in this case that you not use the 's' modifier, which lets the dot metacharacter match newlines as well as all other characters.
Finally, you want to make sure you're matching whole words and not just fragments of longer words, so you need to add word boundaries:
/^(?=.*\bword1\b)(?=.*\bword2\b)(?=.*\bword3\b).*$/m
Look at this example:
We have 2 regexps A and B and we want to match both of them, so in pseudo-code it looks like this:
pattern = "/A AND B/"
It can be written without using the AND operator like this:
pattern = "/NOT (NOT A OR NOT B)/"
in PCRE:
"/(^(^A|^B))/"
regexp_match(pattern,data)
The AND operator is implicit in the RegExp syntax.
The OR operator has instead to be specified with a pipe.
The following RegExp:
var re = /ab/;
means the letter a AND the letter b.
It also works with groups:
var re = /(co)(de)/;
it means the group co AND the group de.
Replacing the (implicit) AND with an OR would require the following lines:
var re = /a|b/;
var re = /(co)|(de)/;
You can do that with a regular expression but probably you'll want to some else. For example use several regexp and combine them in a if clause.
You can enumerate all possible permutations with a standard regexp, like this (matches a, b and c in any order):
(abc)|(bca)|(acb)|(bac)|(cab)|(cba)
However, this makes a very long and probably inefficient regexp, if you have more than couple terms.
If you are using some extended regexp version, like Perl's or Java's, they have better ways to do this. Other answers have suggested using positive lookahead operation.
Is it not possible in your case to do the AND on several matching results? in pseudocode
regexp_match(pattern1, data) && regexp_match(pattern2, data) && ...
Why not use awk?
with awk regex AND, OR matters is so simple
awk '/WORD1/ && /WORD2/ && /WORD3/' myfile
The order is always implied in the structure of the regular expression. To accomplish what you want, you'll have to match the input string multiple times against different expressions.
What you want to do is not possible with a single regexp.
If you use Perl regular expressions, you can use positive lookahead:
For example
(?=[1-9][0-9]{2})[0-9]*[05]\b
would be numbers greater than 100 and divisible by 5
In addition to the accepted answer
I will provide you with some practical examples that will get things more clear to some of You. For example lets say we have those three lines of text:
[12/Oct/2015:00:37:29 +0200] // only this + will get selected
[12/Oct/2015:00:37:x9 +0200]
[12/Oct/2015:00:37:29 +020x]
See demo here DEMO
What we want to do here is to select the + sign but only if it's after two numbers with a space and if it's before four numbers. Those are the only constraints. We would use this regular expression to achieve it:
'~(?<=\d{2} )\+(?=\d{4})~g'
Note if you separate the expression it will give you different results.
Or perhaps you want to select some text between tags... but not the tags! Then you could use:
'~(?<=<p>).*?(?=<\/p>)~g'
for this text:
<p>Hello !</p> <p>I wont select tags! Only text with in</p>
See demo here DEMO
You could pipe your output to another regex. Using grep, you could do this:
grep A | grep B
((yes).*(no))|((no).*(yes))
Will match sentence having both yes and no at the same time, regardless the order in which they appear:
Do i like cookies? **Yes**, i do. But milk - **no**, definitely no.
**No**, you may not have my phone. **Yes**, you may go f yourself.
Will both match, ignoring case.
Use AND outside the regular expression. In PHP lookahead operator did not not seem to work for me, instead I used this
if( preg_match("/^.{3,}$/",$pass1) && !preg_match("/\s{1}/",$pass1))
return true;
else
return false;
The above regex will match if the password length is 3 characters or more and there are no spaces in the password.
Here is a possible "form" for "and" operator:
Take the following regex for an example:
If we want to match words without the "e" character, we could do this:
/\b[^\We]+\b/g
\W means NOT a "word" character.
^\W means a "word" character.
[^\We] means a "word" character, but not an "e".
see it in action: word without e
"and" Operator for Regular Expressions
I think this pattern can be used as an "and" operator for regular expressions.
In general, if:
A = not a
B = not b
then:
[^AB] = not(A or B)
= not(A) and not(B)
= a and b
Difference Set
So, if we want to implement the concept of difference set in regular expressions, we could do this:
a - b = a and not(b)
= a and B
= [^Ab]
I am re-phrasing my question to clear confusions!
I want to match if a string has certain letters for this I use the character class:
[ACD]
and it works perfectly!
but I want to match if the string has those letter(s) 2 or more times either repeated or 2 separate letters
For example:
[AKL] should match:
ABCVL
AAGHF
KKUI
AKL
But the above should not match the following:
ABCD
KHID
LOVE
because those are there but only once!
that's why I was trying to use:
[ACD]{2,}
But it's not working, probably it's not the right Regex.. can somebody a Regex guru can help me solve this puzzle?
Thanks
PS: I will use it on MYSQL - a differnt approach can also welcome! but I like to use regex for smarter and shorter query!
To ensure that a string contains at least two occurencies in a set of letters (lets say A K L as in your example), you can write something like this:
[AKL].*[AKL]
Since the MySQL regex engine is a DFA, there is no need to use a negated character class like [^AKL] in place of the dot to avoid backtracking, or a lazy quantifier that is not supported at all.
example:
SELECT 'KKUI' REGEXP '[AKL].*[AKL]';
will return 1
You can follow this link that speaks on the particular subject of the LIKE and the REGEXP features in MySQL.
If I understood you correctly, this is quite simple:
[A-Z].*?[A-Z]
This looks for your something in your set, [A-Z], and then lazily matches characters until it (potentially) comes across the set, [A-Z], again.
As #Enigmadan pointed out, a lazy match is not necessary here: [A-Z].*[A-Z]
The expression you are using searches for characters between 2 and unlimited times with these characters ACDFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXZ.
However, your RegEx expression is excluding Y (UVWXZ])) therefore Z cannot be found since it is not surrounded by another character in your expression and the same principle applies to B ([ACD) also excluded in you RegEx expression. For example Z and A would match in an expression like ZABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZA
If those were not excluded on purpose probably better can be to use ranges like [A-Z]
If you want 2 or more of a match on [AKL], then you may use just [AKL] and may have match >= 2.
I am not good at SQL regex, but may be something like this?
check (dbo.RegexMatch( ['ABCVL'], '[AKL]' ) >= 2)
To put it in simple English, use [AKL] as your regex, and check the match on the string to be greater than 2. Here's how I would do in Java:
private boolean search2orMore(String string) {
Matcher matcher = Pattern.compile("[ACD]").matcher(string);
int counter = 0;
while (matcher.find())
{
counter++;
}
return (counter >= 2);
}
You can't use [ACD]{2,} because it always wants to match 2 or more of each characters and will fail if you have 2 or more matching single characters.
your question is not very clear, but here is my trial pattern
\b(\S*[AKL]\S*[AKL]\S*)\b
Demo
pretty sure this should work in any case
(?<l>[^AKL\n]*[AKL]+[^AKL\n]*[AKL]+[^AKL\n]*)[\n\r]
replace AKL for letters you need can be done very easily dynamicly tell me if you need it
Is this what you are looking for?
".*(.*[AKL].*){2,}.*" (without quotes)
It matches if there are at least two occurences of your charactes sorrounded by anything.
It is .NET regex, but should be same for anything else
Edit
Overall, MySQL regular expression support is pretty weak.
If you only need to match your capture group a minimum of two times, then you can simply use:
select * from ... where ... regexp('([ACD].*){2,}') #could be `2,` or just `2`
If you need to match your capture group more than two times, then just change the number:
select * from ... where ... regexp('([ACD].*){3}')
#This number should match the number of matches you need
If you needed a minimum of 7 matches and you were using your previous capture group [ACDF-KM-XZ]
e.g.
select * from ... where ... regexp('([ACDF-KM-XZ].*){7,}')
Response before edit:
Your regex is trying to find at least two characters from the set[ACDFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXZ].
([ACDFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXZ]){2,}
The reason A and Z are not being matched in your example string (ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ) is because you are looking for two or more characters that are together that match your set. A is a single character followed by a character that does not match your set. Thus, A is not matched.
Similarly, Z is a single character preceded by a character that does not match your set. Thus, Z is not matched.
The bolded characters below do not match your set
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
If you were to do a global search in the string, only the italicized characters would be matched:
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
I have the following SDDL:
O:BAG:BAD:(A;;CCDCLCSWRP;;;BA)(A;;CCDCSW;;;WD)(A;;CCDCLCSWRP;;;S-1-5-32-562)(A;;CCDCLCSWRP;;;LU)(A;;CCLCRP;;;S-1-5-21-4217728705-3687557540-3107027809-1003)
Unfortunately I keep getting this:
(A;;CCDCLCSWRP;;;BA)(A;;CCDCSW;;;WD)
And what I want is just (A;;CCDCSW;;;WD).
My regex is: (\(A;.+;WD\)) : find "(A;" some characters ending in ";WD)"
I've tried making the match lazy and I've tried excluding the ")(" pair of characters based on a search of the stackoverflow regex tag looking for examples where others have answered similar questions.
I'm really confused why the exclusion of the parens isn't working:
(\(A;.+[^\(\)]*.+;WD\)) : find "(A;" followed by some characters where none of them are ")('' followed by other characters ending in ";WD)"
And this was my guess at using negative look around:
(\(A;.+^((?!\)\().).+;WD\))
which didn't match anything.
I'm also doing this in PowerShell v3.0 with the following code:
$RegExPattern = [regex]"(\($ACE_Type;.*;$ACE_SID\))+?"
if ($SDDL -match $RegExPattern) {
$MatchingACE = $Matches[0]
Where in this instance $ACE_Type = "A" and $ACE_SID = "WD".
You almost had the solution with your second regex pattern. The problem was that you included too many . wildcards. This should be all you need:
A;[^()]+;WD
And of course if you just want to capture the string in between A; and ;WD:
A;([^()]+);WD
Then just replace with \1.
I simplified this a lot and then added lookarounds so that you only matched the intended string (in between A;...;WD). This looks behind for A;, then matches 1+ non-parenthesis characters, while looking ahead for ;WD.
(?<=A;)[^()]+(?=;WD)
Regex101
I am doing pattern match for some names below:
ABCD123_HH1
ABCD123_HH1_K
Now, my code to grep above names is below:
($name, $kind) = $dirname =~ /ABCD(\d+)\w*_([\w\d]+)/;
Now, problem I am facing is that I get both the patterns that is ABCD123_HH1, ABCD123_HH1_K in $dirname. However, my variable $kind doesn't take this ABCD123_HH1_K. It does take ABCD123_HH1 pattern.
Appreciate your time. Could you please tell me what can be done to get pattern with _k.
You need to add the _K part to the end of your regex and make it optional with ?:
/ABCD(\d+)_([\w\d]+(_K)?)/
I also erased the \w*, which is useless and keeps you from correctly getting the HH1_K.
You should check for zero or more occurrences of _K.
* in Perl's regexp means zero or more times
+ means atleast one or more times.
Hence in your regexp, append (_K)*.
Finally, your regexp should be this:
/ABCD(\d+)\w*_([\w\d]+(_K)*)/
\w includes letters, numbers as well as underscores.
So you can use something as simple as this:
/ABCD\w+/