I have such regular expression which checked for at least one special character in the string:
^(.*[^0-9a-zA-Z].*)$
But how could i change this one to check for at least one special character or at leas one number in the string?
.*[^a-zA-Z]+.*
would match anything followed by a special character followed by anything.
Notice that I just removed the 0-9 from the character class (characters included in the square brackets).
Also, I removed the ^ and $ markers -- those match the beginning and end of string respectively. You don't need it because you're making it redundant with the .* (match zero or more of any character) anyway.
In fact, if you're just checking if the string contains a special character, then the following is good enough:
[^a-zA-Z]
you can use the Expresso, it is a smart tool for generate RegExps Expresso
Related
I'm wrestling with how to write a specific regex, and thought I'd come here for a little guidance.
What I'm looking for is an expression that does the following:
Character length of 7 or more
Any single character is one of four patterns (uppercase letters, lowercase letters, numbers and a specific set of special characters. Let's say #$%#).
(Now, here's where I'm having problems):
Another single character would also match with one of the patterns described above EXCEPT for the pattern that was already matched. So, if the first pattern matched is an uppercase letter, the second character match should be a lowercase letter, number or special character from the pattern.
To give you an example, the string AAAAAA# would match, as would the string AAAAAAa. However, the string AAAAAAA, nor would the string AAAAAA& (as the ampersand was not part of the special character pattern).
Any ideas? Thanks!
If you only need two different kinds of characters, you can use the possessive quantifier feature (available in Objective C):
^(?:[a-z]++|[A-Z]++|[0-9]++|[#$%#]++)[a-zA-Z0-9#$%#]+$
or more concise with an atomic group:
^(?>[a-z]+|[A-Z]+|[0-9]+|[#$%#]+)[a-zA-Z0-9#$%#]+$
Since each branch of the alternation is a character class with a possessive quantifier, you can be sure that the first character matched by [a-zA-Z0-9#$%#]+ is from a different class.
About the string size, check it first separately with the appropriate function, if the size is too small, you will avoid the cost of a regex check.
First you need to do a negative lookahead to make sure the entire string doesn't consist of characters from a single group:
(?!(?:[a-z]*|[A-Z]*|[0-9]*|[#$%#]*)$)
Then check that it does contain at least 7 characters from the list of legal characters (and nothing else):
^[a-zA-Z0-9#$%#]{7,}$
Combining them (thanks to Shlomo for pointing that out):
^(?!(?:[a-z]*|[A-Z]*|[0-9]*|[#$%#]*)$)[a-zA-Z0-9#$%#]{7,}$
First of all I am a total noob to regular expressions, so this may be optimized further, and if so, please tell me what to do. Anyway, after reading several articles about regex, I wrote a little regex for my password matching needs:
(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9])(^[A-Z]+[a-z0-9]).{8,20}
What I am trying to do is: it must start with an uppercase letter, must contain a lowercase letter, must contain at least one number must contain at least on special character and must be between 8-20 characters in length.
The above somehow works but it doesn't force special chars(. seems to match any character but I don't know how to use it with the positive lookahead) and the min length seems to be 10 instead of 8. what am I doing wrong?
PS: I am using http://gskinner.com/RegExr/ to test this.
Let's strip away the assertions and just look at your base pattern alone:
(^[A-Z]+[a-z0-9]).{8,20}
This will match one or more uppercase Latin letters, followed by by a single lowercase Latin letter or decimal digit, followed by 8 to 20 of any character. So yes, at minimum this will require 10 characters, but there's no maximum number of characters it will match (e.g. it will allow 100 uppercase letters at the start of the string). Furthermore, since there's no end anchor ($), this pattern would allow any trailing characters after the matched substring.
I'd recommend a pattern like this:
^(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9])(?=.*[!##$])[A-Z]+[A-Za-z0-9!##$]{7,19}$
Where !##$ is a placeholder for whatever special characters you want to allow. Don't forget to escape special characters if necessary (\, ], ^ at the beginning of the character class, and- in the middle).
Using POSIX character classes, it might look like this:
^(?=.*[:lower:])(?=.*[:digit:])(?=.*[:punct:])[:upper:]+[[:alnum:][:punct:]]{7,19}$
Or using Unicode character classes, it might look like this:
^(?=.*[\p{Ll}])(?=.*\d)(?=.*[\p{P}\p{S}])[\p{Lu}]+[\p{L}\d\p{P}\p{S}]{7,19}$
Note: each of these considers a different set of 'special characters', so they aren't identical to the first pattern.
The following should work:
^(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9])(?=.*[^a-zA-Z0-9])[A-Z].{7,19}$
I removed the (?=.*[A-Z]) because the requirement that you must start with an uppercase character already covers that. I added (?=.*[^a-zA-Z0-9]) for the special characters, this will only match if there is at least one character that is not a letter or a digit. I also tweaked the length checking a little bit, the first step here was to remove the + after the [A-Z] so that we know exactly one character has been matched so far, and then changing the .{8,20} to .{7,19} (we can only match between 7 and 19 more characters if we already matched 1).
Well, here is how I would write it, if I had such requirements - excepting situations where it's absolutely not possible or practical, I prefer to break up complex regular expressions. Note that this is English-specific, so a Unicode or POSIX character class (where supported) may make more sense:
/^[A-Z]/ && /[a-z]/ && /[1-9]/ && /[whatever special]/ && ofCorrectLength(x)
That is, I would avoid trying to incorporate all the rules at once.
I have this regex:
^(^?)*\?(.*)$
If I understand correctly, this is the breakdown of what it does:
^ - start matching from the beginning of the string
(^?)* - I don't know know, but it stores it in $1
\? - matches a question mark
(.*)$ - matches anything until the end of the string
So what does (^?)* mean?
The (^?) is simply looking for the literal character ^. The ^ character in a regex pattern only has special meaning when used as the first character of the pattern or the first character in a grouping match []. When used outside those 2 positions the ^ is interpreted literally meaning in looks for the ^ character in the input string
Note: Whether or not ^ outside of the first and grouping position is interpreted literally is regex engine specific. I'm not familiar enough with LUA to state which it does
Lua does not have a conventional regexp language, it has Lua patterns in its place. While they look a lot like regexp, Lua patterns are a distinct language of their own that has a simpler set of rules and most importantly lacks grouping and alternation features.
Interpreted as a Lua pattern, the example will surprising a longtime regexp user since so many details are different.
Lua patterns are described in PiL, and at a first glance are similar enough to a conventional regexp to cause confusion. The biggest differences are probably the lack of an alternation operator |, parenthesis are only used to mark captures, quantifiers (?, -, +, and *) only apply to a character or character class, and % is the escape character not \. A big clue that this example was probably not written with Lua in mind is the lack of the Lua pattern quoting character % applied to any (or ideally, all) of the non-alphanumeric characters in the pattern string, and the suspicious use of \? which smells like a conventional regexp to match a single literal ?.
The simple answer to the question asked is: (^?)* is not a recommended form, and would match ^* or *, capturing the presence or absence of the caret. If that were the intended effect, then I would write it as (%^?)%* to make that clearer.
To see why this is the case, let's take the pattern given and analyze it as a Lua pattern. The entire pattern is:
^(^?)*\?(.*)$
Handed to string.match(), it would be interpreted as follows:
^ anchors the match to the beginning of the string.
( marks the beginning of the first capture.
^ is not at the beginning of the pattern or a character class, so it matches a literal ^ character. For clarity that should likely have been written as %^.
? matches exactly zero or one of the previous character.
) marks the end of the first capture.
* is not after something that can be quantified so it matches a literal * character. For clarity that should likely have been written as %*.
\ in a pattern matches itself, it is not an escape character in the pattern language. However, it is an escape character in a Lua short string literal, making the following character not special to the string literal parser which in this case is moot because the ? that follows was not special to it in any case. So if the pattern were enclosed in double or single quotes, then the \ would be absorbed by string parsing. If written in a long string (as [[^(^?)*\?(.*)$]], the backslash would survive the string parser, to appear in the pattern.
? matches exactly zero or one of the previous character.
( marks the beginning the second capture.
. matches any character at all, effectively a synonym for the class [\000-\255] (remember, in Lua numeric escapes are in decimal not octal as in C).
* matches zero or more of the previous character, greedily.
) marks the end of the second capture.
$ anchors the pattern to the end of the string.
So it matches and captures an optional ^ at the beginning of the string, followed by *, then an optional \ which is not captured, and captures the entire rest of the string. string.match would return two strings on success (either or both of which might be zero length), or nil on failure.
Edit: I've fixed some typos, and corrected an error in my answer, noticed by Egor in a comment. I forgot that in patterns, special symbols loose their specialness when in a spot where it can't apply. That makes the first asterisk match a literal asterisk rather than be an error. The cascade of that falls through most of the answer.
Note that if you really want a true regexp in Lua, there are libraries available that will provide it. That said, the built-in pattern language is quite powerful. If it is not sufficient, then you might be best off adopting a full parser, and use LPeg which can do everything a regexp can and more. It even comes with a module that provides a complete regexp syntax that is translated into an LPeg grammar for execution.
In this case, the (^?) refers to the previous string "^" meaning the literal character ^ as Jared has said. Check out regexlib for any further deciphering.
For all your Regex needs: http://regexlib.com/CheatSheet.aspx
It looks to me like the intent of the creator of the expression was to match any number of ^ before the question mark, but only wanted to capture the first instance of ^. However, it may not be a valid expression depending on the engine, as others have stated.
I need a regex pattern which matches such strings that DO NOT end with such a sequence:
\.[A-z0-9]{2,}
by which I mean the examined string must not have at its end a sequence of a dot and then two or more alphanumeric characters.
For example, a string
/home/patryk/www
and also
/home/patryk/www/
should match desired pattern and
/home/patryk/images/DSC002.jpg should not.
I suppose this has something to do with lookarounds (look aheads) but still I have no idea how to make it.
Any help appreciated.
Old Answer
You can use a negative lookbehind at the end if your regex flavor supports it:
^.*+(?<!\.\w{2,})$
This will match a string that has an end anchor not preceded by the icky sequence you don't want.
Note that as m.buettner has pointed out, this uses an indefinite length lookbehind, which is a feature unique to .NET
New Answer
After a bit of digging around, however, I've found that variable length look-aheads are pretty widely supported, so here is a version that uses those:
^(?:(?!\.\w{2,}$).)++$
In a comment on an answer, you have stated you wanted to not match strings with forward slashes at the end, which is accomplished by simply adding a forward slash to the lookahead.
^(?:(?!(\.\w{2,}|/)$).)++$
Note that I am using \w for succinctness, but it lets underscores through. If this is important, you could replace it with [^\W_].
Asad's version is very convenient, but only .NET's regex engine supports variable-length lookbehinds (which is one of the many reasons why every regex question should include the language or tool used).
We can reduce this to a fixed-length lookbehind (which is supported in most engines except for JavaScrpit) if we think about the possible cases which should match. That would be either one or zero letters/digits at the end (whether preceded by . or not) or two or more letters/digits that are not preceded by a dot.
^.*(?:(?<![a-zA-Z0-9])[a-zA-Z0-9]?|(?<![a-zA-Z0-9.])[a-zA-Z0-9]{2,})$
This should do it:
^(?:[^.]+|\.(?![A-Za-z0-9]{2,}$))+$
It alternates between matching one or more of anything except a dot, or a dot if it's not followed by two or more alphanumeric characters and the end of the string.
EDIT: Upgrading it to meet the new requirement is just more of the same:
^(?:[^./]+|/(?=.)|\.(?![A-Za-z0-9]{2,}$))+$
Breaking that down, we have:
[^./]+ # one or more of any characters except . or /
/(?=.) # a slash, as long as there's at least one character following it
\.(?![A-Za-z0-9]{2,}$) # a dot, unless it's followed by two or more alphanumeric characters followed by the end of the string
On another note: [A-z] is an error. It matches all the uppercase and lowercase ASCII letters, but it also matches the characters [, ], ^, _, backslash and backtick, whose code points happen to lie between Z and a.
Variable length look behinds are rarely supported, but you don't need one:
^.*(?<!\.[A-z0-9][A-z0-9]?)$
I am trying to check if a string contains at least A-Za-z0-9 but not an &.
My experience with regexes is limited, so I started with the easy part and got:
.*[a-zA-Z0-9].*
However I am having troubling combining this with the does not contain an & portion.
I was thinking along the lines of ^(?=.*[a-zA-Z0-9].*)(?![&()]).* but that does not seem to do the trick.
Any help would be appreciated.
I'm not sure if this what you meant, but here is a regular expression that will match any string that:
contains at least one alpha-numeric character
does not contain a &
This expression ensures that the entire string is always matched (the ^ and $ at beginning and end), and that none of the characters matched are a "&" sign (the [^&]* sections):
^[^&]*[a-zA-Z0-9][^&]*$
However, it might be clearer in code to simply perform two checks, if you are not limited to a single expression.
Also, check out the \w class in regular expressions (it might be the better solution for catching alphanumeric chars if you want to allow non-ASCII characters).