Hi I have the NSRegular expression below meant to pull out coordinates from a string such as "167628,79009\r' delivered via a serial port using ORSSerial. The expression, however, matches 8,79009 instead of delivering the full first coordinate. The regex is also used internally by ORSSerial to validate incoming data on the serial port and delivers the truncated string.
If I replace the regex with "(\d{5}),(\d+)\r" it works but this will only be useful when the coordinates delivered are a 5 digit number. If I use d{1,5} I get the same result as when using the line-start anchor.
The regex is ignoring the anchors. Any Suggestions ?
Code
coordinatePacketRegex = [[NSRegularExpression alloc] initWithPattern:#"^(\\d+),(\\d+)\r"
options:NSRegularExpressionAnchorsMatchLines
error:®exError];
Alright, having said that:
If I replace the regex with "(\d{5}),(\d+)\r" it works but this will
only be useful when the coordinates delivered are a 5 digit number.
Your actual problem is that you use NSRegularExpressionAnchorsMatchLines. It will fail on a string like " 167628,79009\r". Don't use this option, use the zero option instead.
I would propose using: (\d{5,}),(\d+)\r (please notice, I added an extra comma after 5. Will serve you for the case of "at least 5 digits in the integral part, capturing as many as possible before a comma". If you are not bound to minimum 5 characters before a comma, just use ((\d+),(\d+)\r). Having the enclosing braces lets you access the whole match as the 0th capture group.
Related
How do i extract four numbers starting after the 8th number which is dynamic from the following strings using regex.
20190715171712904_10008_file_activate_10.20.30.4000233223456_name.unl
20190715141712904_10008_runco_activate_10.20.30.40_name.unl
From first string i want 1717
From second string i want 1417
I have tried to write regex queries in https://regex101.com/ i.e.
I have tried ^\d{8}([0-9]{4})$ but not working.
Drop the $. It forces the expression to look for the end of the string after your 4 digits, which it is not. The answer will be in the first subgroup capture. Note you can use \d for the second [0-9] as well.
If your language supports look-behinds, you can capture your digits as the main capture, instead of a subgroup:
(?<=^\d{8})\d{4}
This is really not a problem for a regular expression though - getting the substring indexed from index 4 to index 7 including (0 indexed) is basic and faster in any language.
I'm trying to capture any 1-2 digit numbers surrounded by '.' or the beginning/end of a line.
E.G
1.0.4.11
71.11.11.11
0.11.0.0
Are valid and:
1.
1111
11.11.11.
01.10
are not valid
Right now I've got (?<=\.|^)\d{1,2}]?(?=\.|$) which will capture the numbers correctly but will also capture groups such as 11.. or 1.11.
I need to extend this regex to basically verify that it is always in the format x.x.x.x where x is 1-2 digits.
For additional information, this regex will run using the wxWidgets regex class but I believe that's the standard regex parser.
NOTE
For anyone using this as reference... Using wxWidgets, the wxRegex class must be constructed with the wxRE_ADVANCEDflag as by default it uses a basic/fast implementation that does not include quantifiers(?*) which are used in this expression.
You can make it less generic by specifically look for your 4 groups between start and end of string (you can remove the \.? if you never have . at the start or end):
^\.?\d{1,2}\.\d{1,2}\.\d{1,2}\.\d{1,2}\.?$
See in Regex101
I am trying to generate a regular expression that will match any numbers within the range of 99 and 9999999. I have trouble understanding how generating number ranges generally works. I managed to find a range generator online that does the job for me, but I want to understand how it actually works.
My attempt to do this range is as follows:
(99|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9])
This is supposed to match 99, any 3 digit number or any 4 digit number, but it does not work as expected. When tested it matches only numbers 99 and 3 digit numbers. Four digit numbers are not matched at all. If I only write the part for 4 digit numbers on its own as
[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]
It matches 4 digit numbers, but when I construct it as in the first example it does not work. Can someone give me some clarification how this actually works and how successfully to generate a regular expression for the range of 99 to 9999999.
Link to demo - Here
So you want to know how this works...
Regexs have no real understanding of the values of numbers in your string, it only cares how they are represented, which is why looking for numbers in a range seems more awkward than it should be. The only reason your regex engine can understand a range in a character class like [0-9] at all is because of the characters' positions in a list (a character range like [&-~] is just as valid, and equally understandable to it.)
So, to match a range like 99-9999999, ya gotta spell out what that looks like: literal "99", or three digits without a leading zero, or four digits without a leading zero, and so on.
But this is what your demo did, right? And it didn't work. Of your test string "9293" your regex only matched "929". What happened here is the regex engine is eager to return a complete match - as soon as it found one it returned it, even though a better/longer match might have occurred later.
Here's how that match happened. (I'll skip some details like grouping, as they're not super relevant here.)
Step 1.
The engine compares the first token in the regex with the first character in the string
(99|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9])
9293 ✅
Success, they match.
Step 2.
The engine then advances both to the next token in the regex and the next character in the string and compares them.
(99|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9])
9293 ❌
Failure, no match. The engine would stop and return the failure here, but you're using alternation via |, so it knows there's an alternate expression to try.
Step 3.
The engine advances to the first token of the next alternate expression in the regex, and rewinds the position in the string.
(99|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9])
9293 ✅
Success, they match.
Step 4.
Continuing on.
(99|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9])
9293 ✅
Match.
Step 5.
And again.
(99|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9])
9293 ✅
Success. The complete expression matches. There's no need to try the remaining alternate. The match here returned is:
929
As you've probably figured out, if your input string was instead "9923" then step 2 would've matched and the engine there would've stopped and returned "99".
As you've also probably figured out, if you rearrange your alternate expressions from longest to shortest
([1-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]|[1-9][0-9][0-9]|99)
the longest would be attempted first, which would match and return your expected "9293".
Simplifying
It's still pretty wordy though, especially as you crank up the number of digits in your range. There are a couple things you can do to simplify it.
The character class [0-9] can be represented by the shorthand character class \d.
([1-9]\d\d\d|[1-9]\d\d|99)
And instead of repeating them use a quantifier in curly brackets like so:
([1-9]\d{3}|[1-9]\d{2}|99)
As it happens, quantifiers can also take the form of {min, max}, so you can combine the two similar alternates:
([1-9]\d{2,3}|99)
You might expect this to land you back returning "929" again, the engine being eager and all, but quantifiers are by default greedy so they'll try to pick up as much as they can. This lends itself well to your larger desired range:
([1-9]\d{2,6}|99)
Finishing up
What you do with it from here depends on what you need the regex to do. As it stands the parentheses are superfluous, there's no point in creating a capturing group of the entire regex itself. However a decision comes when you've got an input string like:
You will likely be eaten by 1000 grue.
If you're trying to pluck out how many grue are about to eat you, you might use
[1-9]\d{2,6}|99
which will return 1000.
However that sorta runs back into the original problem with your demo. If it's "12345678 grue", which is out of range, this'll match "1234567" which might not be what you want. You can make sure the number you've matched isn't immediately followed by (or preceded by) another digit by using negative lookarounds.
(?<!\d)([1-9]\d{2,6}|99)(?!\d)
(?<!\d) means "from this position, the prior character is not a digit" while (?!\d) means "from this position, the next character is not a digit."
The parentheses around the alternates are back as they're necessary for grouping here, otherwise the lookbehind would only be part of and apply in the first alternate expression and the lookahead would only be part of and apply in the second alternate.
On the other hand if you're trying to make sure the entire string only consists of a number in your range you'll want to instead use the anchors ^ and $ (start of string and end of string, respectively):
^([1-9]\d{2,6}|99)$
And finally you can trade the capturing group out for a non-capturing group (?:...), so:
^(?:[1-9]\d{2,6}|99)$
or
(?<!\d)(?:[1-9]\d{2,6}|99)(?!\d)
You'll still grab the number as the match, it just won't be repeated in a group capture. (Lookarounds are already non-capturing, no need to worry about those.)
First of all you need some string boundaries for you regex (anything except digit, in my example I use ^ and $ -- begging and end of line or string)
Try this one:
^([1-9][0-9]{2,6}|99)$
I am trying to use Regex to return the nth word in a string. This would be simple enough using other answers to similar questions; however, I do not have access to any of the code. I can only access a regex input field and the server only returns the 'full match' and cannot be made to return any captured groups such as 'group 1'
EDIT:
From the developers explaining the version of regex used:
"...its javascript regex so should mostly be compatible with perl i
believe but not as advanced, its fairly low level so wasn't really
intended for use by end users when originally implemented - i added
the dropdown with the intention of having some presets going
forwards."
/EDIT
Sample String:
One Two Three Four Five
Attempted solution (which is meant to get just the 2nd word):
^(?:\w+ ){1}(\S+)$
The result is:
One Two
I have also tried other variations of the regex:
(?:\w+ ){1}(\S+)$
^(?:\w+ ){1}(\S+)
But these just return the entire string.
I have tried replicating the behaviour that I see using regex101 but the results seem to be different, particularly when changing around the ^ and $.
For example, I get the same output on regex101 if I use the altered regex:
^(?:\w+ ){1}(\S+)
In any case, none of the comparing has helped me actually achieve my stated aim.
I am hoping that I have just missed something basic!
===EDIT===
Thanks to all of you who have contributed thus far, however, I am still running into issues. I am afraid that I do not know the language or restrictions on the regex other than what I can ascertain through trial and error, therefore here is a list of attempts and results all of which are trying to return "Two" from a sample of:
One Two Three Four Five
\w+(?=( \w+){1}$)
returns all words
^(\w+ ){1}\K(\w+)
returns no words atall (so I assume that \K does not work)
(\w+? ){1}\K(\w+?)(?= )
returns no words at all
\w+(?=\s\w+\s\w+\s\w+$)
returns all words
^(?:\w+\s){1}\K\w+
returns all words
====
With all of the above not working, I thought I would test out some others to see the limitations of the system
Attempting to return the last word:
\w+$
returns all words
This leads me to believe that something strange is going on with the start ^ and end $ characters, perhaps the server puts these in automatically if they are omitted? Any more ideas greatly appreciated.
I don't known if your language supports positive lookbehind, so using your example,
One Two Three Four Five
here is a solution which should work in every language :
\w+ match the first word
\w+$ match the last word
\w+(?=\s\w+$) match the 4th word
\w+(?=\s\w+\s\w+$) match the 3rd word
\w+(?=\s\w+\s\w+\s\w+$) match the 2nd word
So if a string contains 10 words :
The first and the last word are easy to find. To find a word at a position, then you simply have to use this rule :
\w+(?= followed by \s\w+ (10 - position) times followed by $)
Example
In this string :
One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Height Nine Ten
I want to find the 6th word.
10 - 6 = 4
\w+(?= followed by \s\w+ 4 times followed by $)
Our final regex is
\w+(?=\s\w+\s\w+\s\w+\s\w+$)
Demo
It's possible to use reset match (\K) to reset the position of the match and obtain the third word of a string as follows:
(\w+? ){2}\K(\w+?)(?= )
I'm not sure what language you're working in, so you may or may not have access to this feature.
I'm not sure if your language does support \K, but still sharing this anyway in case it does support:
^(?:\w+\s){3}\K\w+
to get the 4th word.
^ represents starting anchor
(?:\w+\s){3} is a non-capturing group that matches three words (ending with spaces)
\K is a match reset, so it resets the match and the previously matched characters aren't included
\w+ helps consume the nth word
Regex101 Demo
And similarly,
^(?:\w+\s){1}\K\w+ for the 2nd word
^(?:\w+\s){2}\K\w+ for the 3rd word
^(?:\w+\s){3}\K\w+ for the 4th word
and so on...
So, on the down side, you can't use look behind because that has to be a fixed width pattern, but the "full match" is just the last thing that "full matches", so you just need something whose last match is your word.
With Positive look-ahead, you can get the nth word from the right
\w+(?=( \w+){n}$)
If your server has extended regex, \K can "clear matched items", but most regex engines don't support this.
^(\w+ ){n}\K(\w+)
Unfortunately, Regex doesn't have a standard "match only n'th occurrence", So counting from the right is the best you can do. (Also, Regex101 has a searchable quick reference in the bottom right corner for looking up special characters, just remember that most of those characters are not supported by all regex engines)
so basically I want to detect if in these strings:
Hello 123 My 222 dear 112 troll 12 8889
192.1.1.254:10000
the numbers are in a format like this:
[0 to 255][ANYTHING][0 to 255][ANYTHING][0 to 255][ANYTHING][0 to 255][ANYTHING][0 to 65536]
Does anyone know how I can build such a regex?
It is for detecting if anyone posts an IP:Port in unusual format to bypass default ip:port filters.
Edit: As for the first comment: I do not know regex and what I have tried is:
if(regex_match("192.168 najlepszy serwer SAMP!!1 1 join1!! 8080","/^[0-2](*)?[0-5](*)?[0-5](*).(*)[0-2](*)?[0-5](*)?[0-5](*).(*)[0-2](*)?[0-5](*)?[0-5](*).(*)[0-2](*)?[0-5](*)?[0-5](*)?$/"))
{
print("Cannot send message");
}
else
{
print("New message for everyone! :)");
}
and some other not working regexes.
If you don't want to complicate your life checking the exact ranges, the simple regex would be:
/^.*(\d)+.+(\d)+.+(\d)+.+(\d)+.+(\d)+.*$/
The first four (\d)+ parts can be replaced with more complicated check for 0-255 range:
(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?)
the last (\d)+ replace with next for port range check:
(6553[0-5]|655[0-2]\d|65[0-4]\d\d|6[0-4]\d\d\d|[1-5]\d\d\d\d|[1-9]\d{0,3})
An exact, simple, and direct representation of your pattern as a regular expression is not possible in the general case. The reason are the number ranges. Something like "at this place any integral number with a value from a to b" is just to complex. A regular expression is executed by a finite state machine and these (theoretical) beasts are (basically) only able to look at strings character by character. Therefore you can match something like "ignore all characters until you find the first digit, then check whether the first digit is followed by at most two more digits".
As a workaround you may try to build a list of alternations of possible digit patterns that covers your desired range of values (in the extreme case list every single value like \b(?:1|2|3|4|...|154|155|...|255)\b). I have a pattern for the range 0-255, but I have none for the range of possible port numbers. So a first approximation may be (really, this is only an approximation and not thoroughly tested):
\b(?:[0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9][0-9]|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])\b.*\b(?:[0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9][0-9]|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])\b.*\b(?:[0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9][0-9]|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])\b.*\b(?:[0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9][0-9]|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])\b[^0-9]*[0-9]{1,5}
In the above pattern (?: .... ) means a shy group (not remembered for back references) and \b means word boundary.
I'd suggest you read up on Regex syntax. For starters . is special and matches any character. Also doing something like [0-2][0-5][0-5] won't catch something like 192 as 9 is not within 0-5.
According to your requirements here's a Regex that should roughly do what you want
([0-2]?\d{1,2}).*([0-2]?\d{1,2}).*([0-2]?\d{1,2}).*([0-2]?\d{1,2}).*(\d{1,5})?
Each of the ([0-2]?\d{1,2}) portions will match 1 or 2 digits preceded optionally with a 0,1, or 2. Each () will capture a group which you can then examine using a Regex engine. You will need to examine this group as the Regex for each of those portions will match numbers above 255 (specifically 256-299).
The last group (\d{1,5})? is to catch the port number, again you will have to examine this as it will catch any 1 to 5 digit number (hence the {1,5}). The ? makes the group optional, remove it if you want it to have to match against a port number.
As far as doing Regex in C, I haven't had much experience but there should be a way to get all the grouped matches and inspect them. Unfortunately they will be strings so you will have to convert them to integers to examine them.
Are you sure you need regex for this? In my opinion, you do not need regex for this.
Just split numbers into groups which are seperated by non-numeric characters. Then analyze.
What language?
As for actually looking for valid range, take a look at this;
http://www.regular-expressions.info/numericranges.html
I would do this simple regex
((\d|\D)+)*