I have group of some regexps and want to match current line for each of them, if match succeeded call some function with matched groups as parameters.
my %regexps = (
"a" => qr/^(a)\s*(b)/o,
"b" => qr/^(c)\s*(d)/o,
"c" => qr/^(e)\s*(f)/o,
);
sub call_on_match {
my $actions = shift;
# ... some setup actions for $_
while (my ($regexp, $func) = each(%$actions) ) {
if (my #matches = /$regexp/){
$func->(#matches);
}
}
}
call_on_match({
$regexps{"a"} => \&some_funca,
$regexps{"b"} => \&some_funcb,
$regexps{"c"} => \&some_funcc,
})
The problem is in my #matches = /$regexp/ expression, it executes about 110k times and takes about 1 second total for compilation (Typical profiler output for this line: # spent 901ms making 107954 calls to main::CORE:regcomp, avg 8µs/call.
First guess was to remove additional regexp slashes, in case it makes perl thinks that it is new regexp and must be compiled. I used my #matches = ($_ =~ $regexp), but no success.
Is there another ways to make perl not to recompile qr'ed regexps in this context?
UPD: I replaced hash with array (like [$regexps{"a"}, \&some_funca]):
foreach my $group (#$actions){
my ($regexp, $func) = #$group;
if (my #matches = ($_ =~ $regexp)){
$func->(#matches);
}
}
Now it compiles faster but compilation doesn't disappear: # spent 51.7ms making 107954 calls to main::CORE:regcomp, avg 479ns/call
I suggest that you use the IDs as keys in both hashes, like this
use strict;
use warnings;
my %regexps = (
a => qr/^(a)\s*(b)/,
b => qr/^(c)\s*(d)/,
c => qr/^(e)\s*(f)/,
);
sub call_on_match {
my ($actions) = #_;
# ... some setup actions for $_
while (my ($regexp_id, $func) = each %$actions) {
if (my #matches = $_ =~ $regexps{$regexp_id}) {
$func->(#matches);
}
}
}
call_on_match(
{
a => \&some_funca,
b => \&some_funcb,
c => \&some_funcc,
}
);
Related
In perl, I am reading a line and trying to replace a set of strings with corresponding expressions using a sequence of if statements. For example:
my #shiftInstructions=("lsr", "lsl", "rol", "ror");
while (my $line = <>) {
if ($line =~ /\$sh/) {
my $r = int(rand(6));
$line =~ s/\$sh/$r/;
}
if ($line =~ /\$ish/) {
my $r = $shiftInstructions[rand(4)]
$line =~ s/\$ish/$r/;
}
}
I don't like this approach for a number of reasons. First, it is repetitive. I have to first check if the pattern exists, and then if it does, execute a function to generate a replacement value, then substitute. So it is both verbose, and slow (2 regex searches per pattern, perhaps eventually dozens of pattern strings).
I thought of a map where a number of codes are mapped to corresponding code to execute.
I can imagine mapping to a string and then using eval but then I can't check the code except at runtime. Is there any cleaner way of doing this?
I found the execute option in regex. What about writing a set of subroutines to process each regex, then creating a mapping:
my %regexMap = (
"\$fn", &foundFunc,
"\$hw", &hex8,
"\$hb", &hex2,
"\$sh", &rand6,
"\$ish", &shiftInst,
);
while (my $line = <>) {
$line =~ s/(\$fn|\$hw|\$hb|\$sh|\$ish|)/$regexMap{$1}/e;
print $line;
}
if ($line =~ /\$sh/) {
my $r = int(rand(6));
$line =~ s/\$sh/$r/;
}
is a poor way of writing
$line =~ s/\$sh/ int(rand(6)) /e;
So
my #shiftInstructions=("lsr", "lsl", "rol", "ror");
while (my $line = <>) {
if ($line =~ /\$sh/) {
my $r = int(rand(6));
$line =~ s/\$sh/$r/;
}
if ($line =~ /\$ish/) {
my $r = $shiftInstructions[rand(4)]
$line =~ s/\$ish/$r/;
}
print($line);
}
can be written as
my #shiftInstructions = qw( lsr lsl rol ror );
while (my $line = <>) {
$line =~ s/\$sh/ int(rand(6)) /e;
$line =~ s/\$ish/ $shiftInstructions[rand(#shiftInstructions)] /e;
print($line);
}
But that means you are scanning the string over and over again. Let's avoid that.
my #shiftInstructions = qw( lsr lsl rol ror );
while (my $line = <>) {
$line =~ s/\$(sh|ish)/
if ( $1 eq "sh" ) { int(rand(6)) }
elsif ( $1 eq "ish" ) { $shiftInstructions[rand(#shiftInstructions)] }
/eg;
print($line);
}
Unfortunately, that reintroduces repetition. We can solve that using a dispatch table.
my #shiftInstructions = qw( lsr lsl rol ror );
my %replacements = (
sh => sub { int(rand(6)) },
ish => sub { $shiftInstructions[rand(#shiftInstructions)] },
);
my $alt = join '|', map quotemeta, keys(%replacements);
my $re = qr/\$($alt)/;
while (my $line = <>) {
print $line =~ s/$re/ $replacements{$1}->() /reg;
}
Now we have an efficient solution that can be extended without slowing down the matching, all while avoiding repetition.
The solution you added to your question was close, but it had two bugs.
&foo calls foo. To get a reference to it, use \&foo.
my %regexMap = (
"\$fn", \&foundFunc,
"\$hw", \&hex8,
"\$hb", \&hex2,
"\$sh", \&rand6,
"\$ish", \&shiftInst,
);
$regexMap{$1} now returns the reference. You want to call the referenced sub, which can be done using $regexMap{$1}->().
while (my $line = <>) {
$line =~ s/(\$fn|\$hw|\$hb|\$sh|\$ish|)/ $regexMap{$1}->() /e;
print $line;
}
In these cases, I often make some sort of data structure that holds the patterns and their actions:
my #tuples = (
[ qr/.../, sub { ... } ]
[ ... ].
);
Now the meat of the process stays the same no matter how many patterns I want to try:
while( <> ) {
foreach $tuple ( #tuples ) {
$tuple->[1]() if /$tuple[0]/
}
}
Abstract this a little further with a subroutine that takes the data structure. Then you can pass it different tables depending on what you would like to do:
sub some_sub {
my #tuples = #_;
while( <> ) {
foreach $tuple ( #tuples ) {
$tuple->[1]() if /$tuple[0]/
}
}
}
I've written about this sort of thing in Mastering Perl and Effective Perl Programming, and it's the sort of thing that does into my obscure modules like Brick and Data::Constraint.
I've been thinking about this more, and I wonder if regexes are actually part of what you are trying to do. It looks like you are matching literal strings, but using the match operator to do it. You don't give details of the input, so I'm guessing here—it looks like there's an operation (e.g. $fn, and you want to match exactly that operation. The problem is finding that string then mapping it onto code. That looks something like this (and ikegami's answer is another form of this idea). Instead of an alternation, I match anything that might look like the string:
while( <> ) {
# find the string. Need example input to guess better
if( m/(\$[a-z]+)/ ) {
$table{$1}->() if exists $table{$1};
}
}
But again, it's dependent on the input, how many actual substrings you might want to match (so, the number of branches in an alternation), how many lines you want to process, and so on. There was a wonderful talk about processing apache log files with Regex::Trie and the various experiments they tried to make things faster. I've forgotten all the details, but very small adjustments made noticeable differences over tens of millions of lines.
Interesting reading:
Maybe this talk? An exploration of trie regexp matching
http://taint.org/2006/07/07/184022a.html
Matching a long list of phrases
OP's code can be written in following form
use strict;
use warnings;
use feature 'say';
my %regexMap = (
'$fn' => \&foundFunc,
'$hw' => \&hex8,
'$hb' => \&hex2,
'$sh' => \&rand6,
'$ish' => \&shiftInst,
);
my #keys = map { "\\$_" } keys %regexMap;
my $re = join('|', #keys);
while (<DATA>) {
chomp;
next unless /($re)/;
$regexMap{$1}->();
}
sub foundFunc { say 'sub_foundFunc' }
sub hex8 { say 'sub_hex8' }
sub hex2 { say 'sub_hex2' }
sub rand6 { say 'sub_rand6' }
sub shiftInst { say 'sub_shiftInst' }
__DATA__
$fn
$hw
$ac
$hb
$sh
$fn
$mf
$hb
$ish
$hw
Output
sub_foundFunc
sub_hex8
sub_hex2
sub_rand6
sub_foundFunc
sub_hex2
sub_shiftInst
sub_hex8
I have code in a loop similar to
for( my $i=0; $a =~ s/<tag>(.*?)<\/tag>/sprintf("&CITE%03d;",$i)/e ; $i++ ){
%cite{ $i } = $1;
}
but instead of just the integer index, I want to make the keys of the hash the actual replaced-with text (placeholder "&CITE001;", etc.) without having to redo the sprintf().
I was almost sure there was a way to do it (variable similar to $& and such, but maybe I was thinking of vim's substitutions and not perl. :)
Thanks!
my $i = 0;
s{<tag>(.*?)</tag>}{
my $entity = sprintf("&CITE%03d;", $i++);
$cite{$entity} = $1;
$entity
}eg;
I did a something of a hacque, but really wanted something a bit more elegant. What I ended up doing (for now) is
my $t;
for( my $i=0; $t = sprintf("&CITE%04d;",$i), $all =~ s/($oct.*?$cct)/$t/s; $i++ ){
$cites{$t} = $1;
}
but I really wanted something even more "self-contained".
Just being able to grab the replacement string would've made things much simpler, though. This is a simple read-modify-write op.
True, adding the 'g' modifier should help shave some microseconds off it. :D
I think any method other than re-starting the search from the start of the target
is always the better choice.
In that vein and, as an alternative, you can move the logic inside the regex
via a Code Construct (?{ code }) and leverage the fact that $^N contains
the last capture content.
Perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use Data::Dumper;
$Data::Dumper::Sortkeys = 1;
my $target = "<tag>zero</tag>\n<tag>one</tag>\n<tag>two</tag>\n<tag>three</tag>";
my %cite;
my ($cnt,$key) = (0,'');
$target =~ s/
<tag> (.*?) <\/tag>
(?{
$key = sprintf("&CITE%03d;", $cnt++);
$cite{$key} = $^N;
})
/$key/xg;
print $target, "\n";
print Dumper(\%cite);
Output
&CITE000;
&CITE001;
&CITE002;
&CITE003;
$VAR1 = {
'&CITE000;' => 'zero',
'&CITE001;' => 'one',
'&CITE002;' => 'two',
'&CITE003;' => 'three'
};
Edited/code by #Ikegami
use strict;
use warnings;
use Data::Dumper;
$Data::Dumper::Sortkeys = 1;
sub f {
my $target = "<tag>zero</tag>\n<tag>one</tag>\n<tag>two</tag>\n<tag>three</tag>";
my %cite;
my ($cnt,$key) = (0,'');
$target =~ s/
<tag> (.*?) <\/tag>
(?{
$key = sprintf("&CITE%03d;", $cnt++);
$cite{$key} = $^N;
})
/$key/xg;
print $target, "\n";
print Dumper(\%cite);
}
f() for 1..2;
Output
Variable "$key" will not stay shared at (re_eval 1) line 2.
Variable "$cnt" will not stay shared at (re_eval 1) line 2.
Variable "%cite" will not stay shared at (re_eval 1) line 3.
&CITE000;
&CITE001;
&CITE002;
&CITE003;
$VAR1 = {
'&CITE000;' => 'zero',
'&CITE001;' => 'one',
'&CITE002;' => 'two',
'&CITE003;' => 'three'
};
$VAR1 = {};
This issue has been addressed in 5.18.
Perl by #sln
See, now I don't get that issue in version 5.20.
And, I don't believe I got it in 5.12 either.
use strict;
use warnings;
use Data::Dumper;
$Data::Dumper::Sortkeys = 1;
sub wrapper {
my ($targ, $href) = #_;
my ($cnt, $key) = (0,'');
$$targ =~ s/<tag>(.*?)<\/tag>(?{ $key = sprintf("&CITE%03d;", $cnt++); $href->{$key} = $^N; })/$key/g;
}
my ($target,%cite) = ("<tag>zero</tag>\n<tag>one</tag>\n<tag>two</tag>\n<tag>three</tag>", ());
wrapper( \$target, \%cite );
print $target, "\n";
print Dumper(\%cite);
($target,%cite) = ("<tag>zero</tag>\n<tag>one</tag>\n<tag>two</tag>\n<tag>three</tag>", ());
wrapper( \$target, \%cite );
print $target, "\n";
print Dumper(\%cite);
Output
&CITE000;
&CITE001;
&CITE002;
&CITE003;
$VAR1 = {
'&CITE000;' => 'zero',
'&CITE001;' => 'one',
'&CITE002;' => 'two',
'&CITE003;' => 'three'
};
&CITE000;
&CITE001;
&CITE002;
&CITE003;
$VAR1 = {
'&CITE000;' => 'zero',
'&CITE001;' => 'one',
'&CITE002;' => 'two',
'&CITE003;' => 'three'
};
I'm trying to dynamically catch regex matching in Perl. I've known that eval will help me do this but I may be doing something wrong.
Code:
use strict;
use warnings;
my %testHash = (
'(\d+)\/(\d+)\/(\d+)' => '$1$2$3'
);
my $str = '1/12/2016';
foreach my $pattern (keys (%testHash)) {
my $value = $testHash{$pattern};
my $result;
eval {
local $_ = $str;
/$pattern/;
print "\$1 - $1\n";
print "\$2 - $2\n";
print "\$3 - $3\n";
eval { print "$value\n"; }
}
}
Is it also possible to store captured regex patterns in an array?
I believe what you really want is a dynamic version of the following:
say $str =~ s/(\d+)\/(\d+)\/(\d+)/$1$2$3/gr;
String::Substitution provides what we need to achieve that.
use String::Substitution qw( gsub_copy );
for my $pattern (keys(%testHash)) {
my $replacement = $testHash{$pattern};
say gsub_copy($str, $pattern, $replacement);
}
Note that $replacement can also be a callback. This permits far more complicated substitutions. For example, if you wanted to convert 1/12/2016 into 2016-01-12, you could use the following:
'(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)' => sub { sprintf "%d-%02d-%02d", #_[3,1,2] },
To answer your actual question:
use String::Substitution qw( interpolate_match_vars last_match_vars );
for my $pattern (keys(%testHash)) {
my $template = $testHash{$pattern};
$str =~ $pattern # Or /$pattern/ if you prefer
or die("No match!\n");
say interpolate_match_vars($template, last_match_vars());
}
I am not completely sure what you want to do here, but I don't think your program does what you think it does.
You are useing eval with a BLOCK of code. That's like a try block. If it dies inside of that eval block, it will catch that error. It will not run your string like it was code. You need a string eval for that.
Instead of explaining that, here's an alternative.
This program uses sprintf and numbers the parameters. The %1$s syntax in the pattern says _take the first argument (1$) and format it as a string (%s). You don't need to localize or assign to $_ to do a match. The =~ operator does that on other variables for you. I also use qr{} to create a quoted regular expression (essentially a variable containing a precompiled pattern) that I can use directly. Because of the {} as delimiter, I don't need to escape the slashes.
use strict;
use warnings;
use feature 'say'; # like print ..., "\n"
my %testHash = (
qr{(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)} => '%1$s.%2$s.%3$s',
qr{(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+) nomatch} => '%1$s.%2$s.%3$s',
qr{(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d\d\d\d)} => '%3$4d-%2$02d-%1$02d',
qr{\d} => '%s', # no capture group
);
my $str = '1/12/2016';
foreach my $pattern ( keys %testHash ) {
my #captures = ( $str =~ $pattern );
say "pattern: $pattern";
if ($#+ == 0) {
say " no capture groups";
next;
}
unless (#captures) {
say " no match";
next;
}
# debug-output
for my $i ( 1 .. $#- ) {
say sprintf " \$%d - %s", $i, $captures[ $i - 1 ];
}
say sprintf $testHash{$pattern}, #captures;
}
I included four examples:
The first pattern is the one you had. It uses %1$s and so on as explained above.
The second one does not match. We check the number of elements in #captured by looking at it in scalar context.
The third one shows that you can also reorder the result, or even use the sprintf formatting.
The last one has no capture group. We check by looking at the index of the last element ($# as the sigil for arrays that usually have an # sigil) in #+, which holds the offsets of the ends of the last successful submatches in the currently active dynamic scope. The first element is the end of the overall match, so if this only has one element, we don't have capture groups.
The output for me is this:
pattern: (?^:(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d\d\d\d))
$1 - 1
$2 - 12
$3 - 2016
2016-12-01
pattern: (?^:(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+) nomatch)
no match
pattern: (?^:\d)
no capture groups
pattern: (?^:(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+))
$1 - 1
$2 - 12
$3 - 2016
1.12.2016
Note that the order in the output is mixed up. That's because hashes are not ordered in Perl, and if you iterate over the keys in a hash without sort the order is random.
Apologies! I realized both my question and sample code were both vague. But after reading your suggestions I came of with the following code.
I haven't optimized this code yet and there is a limit to the replacement.
foreach my $key (keys %testHash) {
if ( $str =~ $key ) {
my #matchArr = ($str =~ $key); # Capture all matches
# Search and replace (limited from $1 to $9)
for ( my $i = 0; $i < #matchArr; $i++ ) {
my $num = $i+1;
$testHash{$key} =~ s/\$$num/$matchArr[$i]/;
}
$result = $testHash{$key};
last;
}
}
print "$result\n";
Evaluing the regexp in list context returns the matches. so in your example:
use Data::Dumper; # so we can see the result
foreach my $pattern (keys (%testHash)) {
my #a = ($str =~/$pattern/);
print Dumper(\#a);
}
would do the job.
HTH
Georg
Is it also possible to store captured regex patterns in an array?
Of course it is possible to store captured substrings in an array:
#!/usr/bin/env perl
use strict;
use warnings;
my #patterns = map qr{$_}, qw{
(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)
};
my $str = '1/12/2016';
foreach my $pattern ( #patterns ) {
my #captured = ($str =~ $pattern)
or next;
print "'$_'\n" for #captured;
}
Output:
'1'
'12'
'2016'
I do not quite understand what you are trying to do with combinations of local, eval EXPR and eval BLOCK in your code and the purpose of the following hash:
my %testHash = (
'(\d+)\/(\d+)\/(\d+)' => '$1$2$3'
);
If you are trying to codify that this pattern should result in three captures, you can do that like this:
my #tests = (
{
pattern => qr{(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)},
ncaptures => 3,
}
);
my $str = '1/12/2016';
foreach my $test ( #tests ) {
my #captured = ($str =~ $test->{pattern})
or next;
unless (#captured == $test->{ncaptures}) {
# handle failure
}
}
See this answer to find out how you can automate counting the number of capture groups in a pattern. Using the technique in that answer:
#!/usr/bin/env perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use Test::More;
my #tests = map +{ pattern => qr{$_}, ncaptures => number_of_capturing_groups($_) }, qw(
(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)
);
my $str = '1/12/2016';
foreach my $test ( #tests ) {
my #captured = ($str =~ $test->{pattern});
ok #captured == $test->{ncaptures};
}
done_testing;
sub number_of_capturing_groups {
"" =~ /|$_[0]/;
return $#+;
}
Output:
ok 1
1..1
Is there a way to use a variable as modifier in a substitution?
my $search = 'looking';
my $replace = '"find: $1 ="';
my $modifier = 'ee';
s/$search/$replace/$modifier;
I need to use an array of hashes to make bulk search-replace with different modifiers.
While the method using eval to compile a new substitution is probably the most straightforward, you can create a substitution that is more modular:
use warnings;
use strict;
sub subst {
my ($search, $replace, $mod) = #_;
if (my $eval = $mod =~ s/e//g) {
$replace = qq{'$replace'};
$replace = "eval($replace)" for 1 .. $eval;
} else {
$replace = qq{"$replace"};
}
sub {s/(?$mod)$search/$replace/ee}
}
my $sub = subst '(abc)', 'uc $1', 'ise';
local $_ = "my Abc string";
$sub->();
print "$_\n"; # prints "my ABC string"
This is only lightly tested, and it is left as an exercise for the reader to implement other flags like g
You could use eval, if you put on your safety goggles and your divide-by-zero suit.
E.g.:
use strict;
use warnings;
sub mk_re {
my ($search, $replace, $modifier) = #_;
$modifier ||= '';
die "Bad modifier $modifier" unless $modifier =~ /^[msixge]*$/;
my $sub = eval "sub { s/($search)/$replace/$modifier; }";
die "Error making regex for [$search][$replace][$modifier]: $#" unless $sub;
return $sub;
}
my $search = 'looking';
my $replace = '"find: $1 ="';
my $modifier = 'e';
# Sub can be stored in an array or hash
my $sub = mk_re($search, $replace, $modifier);
$_ = "abc-looking-def";
print "$_\n";
$sub->();
print "$_\n";
Hm, if I had to do it I would do like this:
use warnings;
use strict;
my #stuff = (
{
search => "this",
replace => "that",
modifier => "g",
},
{
search => "ono",
replace => "wendy",
modifier => "i",
}
);
$_ = "this ono boo this\n";
for my $h (#stuff) {
if ($h->{modifier} eq 'g') {
s/$h->{search}/$h->{replace}/g;
} elsif ($h->{modifier} eq 'i') {
s/$h->{search}/$h->{replace}/i;
}
# etc.
}
print;
There are only so many different modifiers you might want to use so I think this is easy enough.
You can use eval for this, but it's awfully messy.
Of course s/$search/$replace/ work as you expect. It is the dynamic modifiers that are not straightforward.
For the regular match modifiers of pimsx you can use Perl's Extended Patterns to modify the modifier flags on the fly as part of your pattern. These are of the form (?pimsx-imsx) to turn on / off those modifiers.
For the s// e and ee forms, you can use (?{ perl code}) documented in the same perlre section. For all of eval e or ee forms, consider the security of the resulting code!
There is no form to modify global to first match that I am aware of, so global vs first match would need to be separate statements.
Here's a combination of Kinopiko's answer and eval.
eval is used here to generate the lookup table in a controlled and maintainable fashion, and a lookup table is used to save all the if.. elsif.. elsif which are not too fun to look at.
(very lightly tested)
my #stuff = (
{
search => "this",
replace => "that",
modifier => "g",
},
{
search => "ono",
replace => "wendy",
modifier => "i",
}
);
$_ = "this ono boo this\n";
my #modifiers = qw{m s i x g e};
my $s_lookup = {};
foreach my $modifier (#modifiers) {
$s_lookup->{$modifier} = eval " sub { s/\$_[0]/\$_[1]/$modifier } ";
}
for my $h (#stuff) {
$s_lookup->{$h->{modifier}}->($h->{search},$h->{replace});
}
print;
To be fully useful this needs:
combinations of possible modifiers
sort function on the lookup table so 'msi' combination and 'mis' combination will go to the same key.
I have many vendors in database, they all differ in some aspect of their data. I'd like to make data validation rule which is based on previous data.
Example:
A: XZ-4, XZ-23, XZ-217
B: 1276, 1899, 22711
C: 12-4, 12-75, 12
Goal: if user inputs string 'XZ-217' for vendor B, algorithm should compare previous data and say: this string is not similar to vendor B previous data.
Is there some good way/tools to achieve such comparison? Answer could be some generic algoritm or Perl module.
Edit:
The "similarity" is hard to define, i agree. But i'd like to catch to algorithm, which could analyze previous ca 100 samples and then compare the outcome of analyze with new data. Similarity may based on length, on use of characters/numbers, string creation patterns, similar beginning/end/middle, having some separators in.
I feel it is not easy task, but on other hand, i think it has very wide use. So i hoped, there is already some hints.
You may want to peruse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_metric and http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-Levenshtein/Levenshtein.pm (for instance)
Joel and I came up with similar ideas. The code below differentiates 3 types of zones.
one or more non-word characters
alphanumeric cluster
a cluster of digits
It creates a profile of the string and a regex to match input. In addition, it also contains logic to expand existing profiles. At the end, in the task sub, it contains some pseudo logic which indicates how this might be integrated into a larger application.
use strict;
use warnings;
use List::Util qw<max min>;
sub compile_search_expr {
shift;
#_ = #{ shift() } if #_ == 1;
my $str
= join( '|'
, map { join( ''
, grep { defined; }
map {
$_ eq 'P' ? quotemeta;
: $_ eq 'W' ? "\\w{$_->[1],$_->[2]}"
: $_ eq 'D' ? "\\d{$_->[1],$_->[2]}"
: undef
;
} #$_
)
} #_ == 1 ? #{ shift } : #_
);
return qr/^(?:$str)$/;
}
sub merge_profiles {
shift;
my ( $profile_list, $new_profile ) = #_;
my $found = 0;
PROFILE:
for my $profile ( #$profile_list ) {
my $profile_length = #$profile;
# it's not the same profile.
next PROFILE unless $profile_length == #$new_profile;
my #merged;
for ( my $i = 0; $i < $profile_length; $i++ ) {
my $old = $profile->[$i];
my $new = $new_profile->[$i];
next PROFILE unless $old->[0] eq $new->[0];
push( #merged
, [ $old->[0]
, min( $old->[1], $new->[1] )
, max( $old->[2], $new->[2] )
]);
}
#$profile = #merged;
$found = 1;
last PROFILE;
}
push #$profile_list, $new_profile unless $found;
return;
}
sub compute_info_profile {
shift;
my #profile_chunks
= map {
/\W/ ? [ P => $_ ]
: /\D/ ? [ W => length, length ]
: [ D => length, length ]
}
grep { length; } split /(\W+)/, shift
;
}
# Psuedo-Perl
sub process_input_task {
my ( $application, $input ) = #_;
my $patterns = $application->get_patterns_for_current_customer;
my $regex = $application->compile_search_expr( $patterns );
if ( $input =~ /$regex/ ) {}
elsif ( $application->approve_divergeance( $input )) {
$application->merge_profiles( $patterns, compute_info_profile( $input ));
}
else {
$application->escalate(
Incident->new( issue => INVALID_FORMAT
, input => $input
, customer => $customer
));
}
return $application->process_approved_input( $input );
}
Here is my implementation and a loop over your test cases. Basically you give a list of good values to the function and it tries to build a regex for it.
output:
A: (?^:\w{2,2}(?:\-){1}\d{1,3})
B: (?^:\d{4,5})
C: (?^:\d{2,2}(?:\-)?\d{0,2})
code:
#!/usr/bin/env perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use List::MoreUtils qw'uniq each_arrayref';
my %examples = (
A => [qw/ XZ-4 XZ-23 XZ-217 /],
B => [qw/ 1276 1899 22711 /],
C => [qw/ 12-4 12-75 12 /],
);
foreach my $example (sort keys %examples) {
print "$example: ", gen_regex(#{ $examples{$example} }) || "Generate failed!", "\n";
}
sub gen_regex {
my #cases = #_;
my %exploded;
# ex. $case may be XZ-217
foreach my $case (#cases) {
my #parts =
grep { defined and length }
split( /(\d+|\w+)/, $case );
# #parts are ( XZ, -, 217 )
foreach (#parts) {
if (/\d/) {
# 217 becomes ['\d' => 3]
push #{ $exploded{$case} }, ['\d' => length];
} elsif (/\w/) {
#XZ becomes ['\w' => 2]
push #{ $exploded{$case} }, ['\w' => length];
} else {
# - becomes ['lit' => '-']
push #{ $exploded{$case} }, ['lit' => $_ ];
}
}
}
my $pattern = '';
# iterate over nth element (part) of each case
my $ea = each_arrayref(values %exploded);
while (my #parts = $ea->()) {
# remove undefined (i.e. optional) parts
my #def_parts = grep { defined } #parts;
# check that all (defined) parts are the same type
my #part_types = uniq map {$_->[0]} #def_parts;
if (#part_types > 1) {
warn "Parts not aligned\n";
return;
}
my $type = $part_types[0]; #same so make scalar
# were there optional parts?
my $required = (#parts == #def_parts);
# keep the values of each part
# these are either a repitition or lit strings
my #values = sort uniq map { $_->[1] } #def_parts;
# these are for non-literal quantifiers
my $min = $required ? $values[0] : 0;
my $max = $values[-1];
# write the specific pattern for each type
if ($type eq '\d') {
$pattern .= '\d' . "{$min,$max}";
} elsif ($type eq '\w') {
$pattern .= '\w' . "{$min,$max}";
} elsif ($type eq 'lit') {
# quote special characters, - becomes \-
my #uniq = map { quotemeta } uniq #values;
# join with alternations, surround by non-capture grouup, add quantifier
$pattern .= '(?:' . join('|', #uniq) . ')' . ($required ? '{1}' : '?');
}
}
# build the qr regex from pattern
my $regex = qr/$pattern/;
# test that all original patterns match (#fail should be empty)
my #fail = grep { $_ !~ $regex } #cases;
if (#fail) {
warn "Some cases fail for generated pattern $regex: (#fail)\n";
return '';
} else {
return $regex;
}
}
To simplify the work of finding the pattern, optional parts may come at the end, but no required parts may come after optional ones. This could probably be overcome but it might be hard.
If there was a Tie::StringApproxHash module, it would fit the bill here.
I think you're looking for something that combines the fuzzy-logic functionality of String::Approx and the hash interface of Tie::RegexpHash.
The former is more important; the latter would make light work of coding.