I'm trying to parse a log file that looks like this:
%%%% 09-May-2009 04:10:29
% Starting foo
this is stuff
to ignore
%%%% 09-May-2009 04:10:50
% Starting bar
more stuff
to ignore
%%%% 09-May-2009 04:11:29
...
This excerpt contains two time periods I'd like to extract, from the first delimiter to the second, and from the second to the third. I'd like to use a regular expression to extract the start and stop times for each of these intervals. This mostly works:
p = '%{4} (?<start>.*?)\n% Starting (?<name>.*?)\n.*?%{4} (?<stop>.*?)\n';
times = regexp(c,p,'names');
Returning:
times =
1x16 struct array with fields:
start
name
stop
The problem is that this only captures every other period, since the second delimiter is consumed as part of the first match.
In other languages, you can use lookaround operators (lookahead, lookbehind) to solve this problem. The documentation on regular expressions explains how these work in MATLAB, but I haven't been able to get these to work while still capturing the matches. That is, I not only need to be able to match every delimiter, but also I need to extract part of that match (the timestamp).
Is this possible?
P.S. I realize I can solve this problem by writing a simple state machine or by matching on the delimiters and post-processing, if there's no way to get this to work.
Update: Thanks for the workaround ideas, everyone. I heard from the developer and there's currently no way to do this with the regular expression engine in MATLAB.
MATLAB seems unable to capture characters as a token without removing them from the string (or, I should say, I was unable to do so using MATLAB REGEXP). However, by noting that the stop time for one block of text is equal to the start time of the next, I was able to capture just the start times and the names using REGEXP, then do some simple processing to get the stop times from the start times. I used the following sample text:
c =
%%%% 09-May-2009 04:10:29
% Starting foo
this is stuff
to ignore
%%%% 09-May-2009 04:10:50
% Starting bar
more stuff
to ignore
%%%% 09-May-2009 04:11:29
some more junk
...and applied the following expression:
p = '%{4} (?<start>[^\n]*)\n% Starting (?<name>[^\n]*)[^%]*|%{4} (?<start>[^\n]*).*';
The processing can then be done with the following code:
names = regexp(c,p,'names');
[names.stop] = deal(names(2:end).start,[]);
names = names(1:end-1);
...which gives us these results for the above sample text:
>> names(1)
ans =
start: '09-May-2009 04:10:29'
name: 'foo'
stop: '09-May-2009 04:10:50'
>> names(2)
ans =
start: '09-May-2009 04:10:50'
name: 'bar'
stop: '09-May-2009 04:11:29'
If you are doing a lot of parsing and such work, you might consider using Perl from within Matlab. It gives you access to the powerful regex engine of Perl and might also make many other problems easier to solve.
All you should have to do is to wrap a lookahead around the part of the regex that matches the second timestamp:
'%{4} (?<start>.*?)\n% Starting (?<name>.*?)\n.*?(?=%{4} (?<stop>.*?)\n)'
EDIT: Here it is without named groups:
'%{4} (.*?)\n% Starting (.*?)\n.*?(?=%{4} (.*?)\n)'
Related
I'm trying to get the list of all digits preceding a hyphen in a given string (let's say in cell A1), using a Google Sheets regex formula :
=REGEXEXTRACT(A1, "\d-")
My problem is that it only returns the first match... how can I get all matches?
Example text:
"A1-Nutrition;A2-ActPhysiq;A2-BioMeta;A2-Patho-jour;A2-StgMrktg2;H2-Bioth2/EtudeCas;H2-Bioth2/Gemmo;H2-Bioth2/Oligo;H2-Bioth2/Opo;H2-Bioth2/Organo;H3-Endocrino;H3-Génétiq"
My formula returns 1-, whereas I want to get 1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-3- (either as an array or concatenated text).
I know I could use a script or another function (like SPLIT) to achieve the desired result, but what I really want to know is how I could get a re2 regular expression to return such multiple matches in a "REGEX.*" Google Sheets formula.
Something like the "global - Don't return after first match" option on regex101.com
I've also tried removing the undesired text with REGEXREPLACE, with no success either (I couldn't get rid of other digits not preceding a hyphen).
Any help appreciated!
Thanks :)
You can actually do this in a single formula using regexreplace to surround all the values with a capture group instead of replacing the text:
=join("",REGEXEXTRACT(A1,REGEXREPLACE(A1,"(\d-)","($1)")))
basically what it does is surround all instances of the \d- with a "capture group" then using regex extract, it neatly returns all the captures. if you want to join it back into a single string you can just use join to pack it back into a single cell:
You may create your own custom function in the Script Editor:
function ExtractAllRegex(input, pattern,groupId) {
return [Array.from(input.matchAll(new RegExp(pattern,'g')), x=>x[groupId])];
}
Or, if you need to return all matches in a single cell joined with some separator:
function ExtractAllRegex(input, pattern,groupId,separator) {
return Array.from(input.matchAll(new RegExp(pattern,'g')), x=>x[groupId]).join(separator);
}
Then, just call it like =ExtractAllRegex(A1, "\d-", 0, ", ").
Description:
input - current cell value
pattern - regex pattern
groupId - Capturing group ID you want to extract
separator - text used to join the matched results.
Edit
I came up with more general solution:
=regexreplace(A1,"(.)?(\d-)|(.)","$2")
It replaces any text except the second group match (\d-) with just the second group $2.
"(.)?(\d-)|(.)"
1 2 3
Groups are in ()
---------------------------------------
"$2" -- means return the group number 2
Learn regular expressions: https://regexone.com
Try this formula:
=regexreplace(regexreplace(A1,"[^\-0-9]",""),"(\d-)|(.)","$1")
It will handle string like this:
"A1-Nutrition;A2-ActPhysiq;A2-BioM---eta;A2-PH3-Généti***566*9q"
with output:
1-2-2-2-3-
I wasn't able to get the accepted answer to work for my case. I'd like to do it that way, but needed a quick solution and went with the following:
Input:
1111 days, 123 hours 1234 minutes and 121 seconds
Expected output:
1111 123 1234 121
Formula:
=split(REGEXREPLACE(C26,"[a-z,]"," ")," ")
The shortest possible regex:
=regexreplace(A1,".?(\d-)|.", "$1")
Which returns 1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-3- for "A1-Nutrition;A2-ActPhysiq;A2-BioMeta;A2-Patho-jour;A2-StgMrktg2;H2-Bioth2/EtudeCas;H2-Bioth2/Gemmo;H2-Bioth2/Oligo;H2-Bioth2/Opo;H2-Bioth2/Organo;H3-Endocrino;H3-Génétiq".
Explanation of regex:
.? -- optional character
(\d-) -- capture group 1 with a digit followed by a dash (specify (\d+-) multiple digits)
| -- logical or
. -- any character
the replacement "$1" uses just the capture group 1, and discards anything else
Learn more about regex: https://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiPresentation2018x10x14Regex
This seems to work and I have tried to verify it.
The logic is
(1) Replace letter followed by hyphen with nothing
(2) Replace any digit not followed by a hyphen with nothing
(3) Replace everything which is not a digit or hyphen with nothing
=regexreplace(A1,"[a-zA-Z]-|[0-9][^-]|[a-zA-Z;/é]","")
Result
1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-3-
Analysis
I had to step through these procedurally to convince myself that this was correct. According to this reference when there are alternatives separated by the pipe symbol, regex should match them in order left-to-right. The above formula doesn't work properly unless rule 1 comes first (otherwise it reduces all characters except a digit or hyphen to null before rule (1) can come into play and you get an extra hyphen from "Patho-jour").
Here are some examples of how I think it must deal with the text
The solution to capture groups with RegexReplace and then do the RegexExctract works here too, but there is a catch.
=join("",REGEXEXTRACT(A1,REGEXREPLACE(A1,"(\d-)","($1)")))
If the cell that you are trying to get the values has Special Characters like parentheses "(" or question mark "?" the solution provided won´t work.
In my case, I was trying to list all “variables text” contained in the cell. Those “variables text “ was wrote inside like that: “{example_name}”. But the full content of the cell had special characters making the regex formula do break. When I removed theses specials characters, then I could list all captured groups like the solution did.
There are two general ('Excel' / 'native' / non-Apps Script) solutions to return an array of regex matches in the style of REGEXEXTRACT:
Method 1)
insert a delimiter around matches, remove junk, and call SPLIT
Regexes work by iterating over the string from left to right, and 'consuming'. If we are careful to consume junk values, we can throw them away.
(This gets around the problem faced by the currently accepted solution, which is that as Carlos Eduardo Oliveira mentions, it will obviously fail if the corpus text contains special regex characters.)
First we pick a delimiter, which must not already exist in the text. The proper way to do this is to parse the text to temporarily replace our delimiter with a "temporary delimiter", like if we were going to use commas "," we'd first replace all existing commas with something like "<<QUOTED-COMMA>>" then un-replace them later. BUT, for simplicity's sake, we'll just grab a random character such as from the private-use unicode blocks and use it as our special delimiter (note that it is 2 bytes... google spreadsheets might not count bytes in graphemes in a consistent way, but we'll be careful later).
=SPLIT(
LAMBDA(temp,
MID(temp, 1, LEN(temp)-LEN(""))
)(
REGEXREPLACE(
"xyzSixSpaces:[ ]123ThreeSpaces:[ ]aaaa 12345",".*?( |$)",
"$1"
)
),
""
)
We just use a lambda to define temp="match1match2match3", then use that to remove the last delimiter into "match1match2match3", then SPLIT it.
Taking COLUMNS of the result will prove that the correct result is returned, i.e. {" ", " ", " "}.
This is a particularly good function to turn into a Named Function, and call it something like REGEXGLOBALEXTRACT(text,regex) or REGEXALLEXTRACT(text,regex), e.g.:
=SPLIT(
LAMBDA(temp,
MID(temp, 1, LEN(temp)-LEN(""))
)(
REGEXREPLACE(
text,
".*?("®ex&"|$)",
"$1"
)
),
""
)
Method 2)
use recursion
With LAMBDA (i.e. lets you define a function like any other programming language), you can use some tricks from the well-studied lambda calculus and function programming: you have access to recursion. Defining a recursive function is confusing because there's no easy way for it to refer to itself, so you have to use a trick/convention:
trick for recursive functions: to actually define a function f which needs to refer to itself, instead define a function that takes a parameter of itself and returns the function you actually want; pass in this 'convention' to the Y-combinator to turn it into an actual recursive function
The plumbing which takes such a function work is called the Y-combinator. Here is a good article to understand it if you have some programming background.
For example to get the result of 5! (5 factorial, i.e. implement our own FACT(5)), we could define:
Named Function Y(f)=LAMBDA(f, (LAMBDA(x,x(x)))( LAMBDA(x, f(LAMBDA(y, x(x)(y)))) ) ) (this is the Y-combinator and is magic; you don't have to understand it to use it)
Named Function MY_FACTORIAL(n)=
Y(LAMBDA(self,
LAMBDA(n,
IF(n=0, 1, n*self(n-1))
)
))
result of MY_FACTORIAL(5): 120
The Y-combinator makes writing recursive functions look relatively easy, like an introduction to programming class. I'm using Named Functions for clarity, but you could just dump it all together at the expense of sanity...
=LAMBDA(Y,
Y(LAMBDA(self, LAMBDA(n, IF(n=0,1,n*self(n-1))) ))(5)
)(
LAMBDA(f, (LAMBDA(x,x(x)))( LAMBDA(x, f(LAMBDA(y, x(x)(y)))) ) )
)
How does this apply to the problem at hand? Well a recursive solution is as follows:
in pseudocode below, I use 'function' instead of LAMBDA, but it's the same thing:
// code to get around the fact that you can't have 0-length arrays
function emptyList() {
return {"ignore this value"}
}
function listToArray(myList) {
return OFFSET(myList,0,1)
}
function allMatches(text, regex) {
allMatchesHelper(emptyList(), text, regex)
}
function allMatchesHelper(resultsToReturn, text, regex) {
currentMatch = REGEXEXTRACT(...)
if (currentMatch succeeds) {
textWithoutMatch = SUBSTITUTE(text, currentMatch, "", 1)
return allMatches(
{resultsToReturn,currentMatch},
textWithoutMatch,
regex
)
} else {
return listToArray(resultsToReturn)
}
}
Unfortunately, the recursive approach is quadratic order of growth (because it's appending the results over and over to itself, while recreating the giant search string with smaller and smaller bites taken out of it, so 1+2+3+4+5+... = big^2, which can add up to a lot of time), so may be slow if you have many many matches. It's better to stay inside the regex engine for speed, since it's probably highly optimized.
You could of course avoid using Named Functions by doing temporary bindings with LAMBDA(varName, expr)(varValue) if you want to use varName in an expression. (You can define this pattern as a Named Function =cont(varValue) to invert the order of the parameters to keep code cleaner, or not.)
Whenever I use varName = varValue, write that instead.
to see if a match succeeds, use ISNA(...)
It would look something like:
Named Function allMatches(resultsToReturn, text, regex):
UNTESTED:
LAMBDA(helper,
OFFSET(
helper({"ignore"}, text, regex),
0,1)
)(
Y(LAMBDA(helperItself,
LAMBDA(results, partialText,
LAMBDA(currentMatch,
IF(ISNA(currentMatch),
results,
LAMBDA(textWithoutMatch,
helperItself({results,currentMatch}, textWithoutMatch)
)(
SUBSTITUTE(partialText, currentMatch, "", 1)
)
)
)(
REGEXEXTRACT(partialText, regex)
)
)
))
)
I have a large log file, and I want to extract a multi-line string between two strings: start and end.
The following is sample from the inputfile:
start spam
start rubbish
start wait for it...
profit!
here end
start garbage
start second match
win. end
The desired solution should print:
start wait for it...
profit!
here end
start second match
win. end
I tried a simple regex but it returned everything from start spam. How should this be done?
Edit: Additional info on real-life computational complexity:
actual file size: 2GB
occurrences of 'start': ~ 12 M, evenly distributed
occurences of 'end': ~800, near the end of the file.
This regex should match what you want:
(start((?!start).)*?end)
Use re.findall method and single-line modifier re.S to get all the occurences in a multi-line string:
re.findall('(start((?!start).)*?end)', text, re.S)
See a test here.
Do it with code - basic state machine:
open = False
tmp = []
for ln in fi:
if 'start' in ln:
if open:
tmp = []
else:
open = True
if open:
tmp.append(ln)
if 'end' in ln:
open = False
for x in tmp:
print x
tmp = []
This is tricky to do because by default, the re module does not look at overlapping matches. Newer versions of Python have a new regex module that allows for overlapping matches.
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/regex
You'd want to use something like
regex.findall(pattern, string, overlapped=True)
If you're stuck with Python 2.x or something else that doesn't have regex, it's still possible with some trickery. One brilliant person solved it here:
Python regex find all overlapping matches?
Once you have all possible overlapping (non-greedy, I imagine) matches, just determine which one is shortest, which should be easy.
You could do (?s)start.*?(?=end|start)(?:end)?, then filter out everything not ending in "end".
I'm converting a text file to a Tab-Delimited text file, and ran into a bit of a snag. I can get everything I need to work the way I want except for one small part.
One field I'm working with has the home addresses of the subjects as a single entry ("1234 Happy Lane Somewhere, St 12345") and I need each broken down by Street(Tab)City(Tab)State(Tab)Zip. The one part I'm hung up on is the Tab between the State and the Zip.
I've been using input=input.Replace throughout, and it's worked well so far, but I can't think of how to untangle this one. The wildcards I'm used to don't seem to be working, I can't replace ("?? #####") with ("??" + ControlChars.Tab + "#####")...which I honestly didn't expect to work, but it's the only idea on the matter I had.
I've read a bit about using Regex, but have no experience with it, and it seems a bit...overwhelming.
Is Regex my best option for this? If not, are there any other suggestions on solutions I may have missed?
Thanks for your time. :)
EDIT: Here's what I'm using so far. It makes some edits to the line in question, taking care of spaces, commas, and other text I don't need, but I've got nothing for the State/Zip situation; I've a bad habit of wiping something if it doesn't work, but I'll append the last thing I used to the very end, if that'll help.
If input Like "Guar*###/###-####" Then
input = input.Replace("Guar:", "")
input = input.Replace(" ", ControlChars.Tab)
input = input.Replace(",", ControlChars.Tab)
input = "C" + ControlChars.Tab + strAccount + ControlChars.Tab + input
End If
input = System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex.Replace(" #####", ControlChars.Tab + "#####") <-- Just one example of something that doesn't work.
This is what's written to input in this example
" Guar: LASTNAME,FIRSTNAME 999 E 99TH ST CITY,ST 99999 Tel: 999/999-9999"
And this is what I can get as a result so far
C 99999/9 LASTNAME FIRSTNAME 999 E 99TH ST CITY ST 99999 999/999-9999
With everything being exactly what I need besides the "ST 99999" bit (with actual data obviously omitted for privacy and professional whatnots).
UPDATE: Just when I thought it was all squared away, I've got another snag. The raw data gives me this.
# TERMINOLOGY ######### ##/##/#### # ###.##
And the end result is giving me this, because this is a chunk of data that was just fine as-is...before I removed the Tabs. Now I need a way to replace them after they've been removed, or to omit this small group of code from a document-wide Tab genocide I initiate the code with.
#TERMINOLOGY###########/##/########.##
Would a variant on rgx.Replace work best here? Or can I copy the code to a variable, remove Tabs from the document, then insert the variable without losing the tabs?
I think what you're looking for is
Dim r As New System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex(" (\d{5})(?!\d)")
Dim input As String = rgx.Replace(input, ControlChars.Tab + "$1")
The first line compiles the regular expression. The \d matches a digit, and the {5}, as you can guess, matches 5 repetitions of the previous atom. The parentheses surrounding the \d{5} is known as a capture group, and is responsible for putting what's captured in a pseudovariable named $1. The (?!\d) is a more advanced concept known as a negative lookahead assertion, and it basically peeks at the next character to check that it's not a digit (because then it could be a 6-or-more digit number, where the first 5 happened to get matched). Another version is
" (\d{5})\b"
where the \b is a word boundary, disallowing alphanumeric characters following the digits.
At one point in my app, I need to match some strings against a pattern. Let's say that some of the sample strings look as follows:
Hi there, John.
What a lovely day today!
Lovely sunset today, John, isn't it?
Will you be meeting Linda today, John?
Most (not all) of these strings are from pre-defined patterns as follows:
"Hi there, %s."
"What a lovely day today!"
"Lovely sunset today, %s, isn't it?"
"Will you be meeting %s today, %s?"
This library of patterns is ever-expanding (currently at around 1,500), but is manually maintained. The input strings though (the first group) is largely unpredictable. Though most of them will match one of the patterns, some of them will not.
So, here's my question: Given a string (from the first group) as input, I need to know which of the patterns (known second group) it matched. If nothing matched, it needs to tell me that.
I'm guessing the solution involves building a regex out of the patterns, and iteratively checking which one matched. However, I'm unsure what the code to build those regexes looks like.
Note: The strings I've given here are for illustration purposes. In reality, the strings aren't human generated, but are computer-generated human-friendly strings as shown above from systems I don't control. Since they aren't manually typed in, we don't need to worry about things like typos and other human errors. Just need to find which pattern it matches.
Note 2: I could modify the patterns library to be some other format, if that makes it easier to construct the regexes. The current structure, with the printf style %s, isn't set in stone.
I am looking at this as a parsing problem. The idea is that the parser function takes a string and determines if it is valid or not.
The string is valid if you can find it among the given patterns. That means you need an index of all the patterns. The index must be a full text index. Also it must match according to the word position. eg. it should short circuit if the first word of the input is not found among the first word of the patterns. It should take care of the any match ie %s in the pattern.
One solution is to put the patterns in an in memory database (eg. redis) and do a full text index on it. (this will not match according to word position) but you should be able to narrow down to the correct pattern by splitting the input into words and searching. The searches will be very fast because you have a small in memory database. Also note that you are looking for the closest match. One or more words will not match. The highest number of matches is the pattern you want.
An even better solution is to generate your own index in a dictionary format. Here is an example index for the four patterns you gave as a JavaScript object.
{
"Hi": { "there": {"%s": null}},
"What: {"a": {"lovely": {"day": {"today": null}}}},
"Lovely": {"sunset": {"today": {"%s": {"isnt": {"it": null}}}}},
"Will": {"you": {"be": {"meeting": {"%s": {"today": {"%s": null}}}}}}
}
This index is recursive descending according to the word postion. So search for the first word, if found search for the next within the object returned by the first and so on. Same words at a given level will have only one key. You should also match the any case. This should be blinding fast in memory.
My first thought would be to have the regexp engine take all the trouble of handling this. They're usually optimised to handle large amounts of text so it shouldn't be that much of a performance hassle. It's brute force but the performance seems to be okay. And you could split the input into pieces and have multiple processes handle them. Here's my moderately tested solution (in Python).
import random
import string
import re
def create_random_sentence():
nwords = random.randint(4, 10)
sentence = []
for i in range(nwords):
sentence.append("".join(random.choice(string.lowercase) for x in range(random.randint(3,10))))
ret = " ".join(sentence)
print ret
return ret
patterns = [ r"Hi there, [a-zA-Z]+.",
r"What a lovely day today!",
r"Lovely sunset today, [a-zA-Z]+, isn't it?",
r"Will you be meeting [a-zA-Z]+ today, [a-zA-Z]+\?"]
for i in range(95):
patterns.append(create_random_sentence())
monster_pattern = "|".join("(%s)"%x for x in patterns)
print monster_pattern
print "--------------"
monster_regexp = re.compile(monster_pattern)
inputs = ["Hi there, John.",
"What a lovely day today!",
"Lovely sunset today, John, isn't it?",
"Will you be meeting Linda today, John?",
"Goobledigoock"]*2000
for i in inputs:
ret = monster_regexp.search(i)
if ret:
print ".",
else:
print "x",
I've created a hundred patterns. This is the maximum limit of the python regexp library. 4 of them are your actual examples and the rest are random sentences just to stress performance a little.
Then I combined them into a single regexp with 100 groups. (group1)|(group2)|(group3)|.... I'm guessing you'll have to sanitise the inputs for things that can have meanings in regular expressions (like ? etc.). That's the monster_regexp.
Testing one string against this tests it against 100 patterns in a single shot. There are methods that fetch out the exact group which was matched. I test 10000 strings 80% of which should match and 10% which will not. It short cirtcuits so if there's a success, it will be comparatively quick. Failures will have to run through the whole regexp so it will be slower. You can order things based on the frequency of input to get some more performance out of it.
I ran this on my machine and this is my timing.
python /tmp/scratch.py 0.13s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.136 total
which is not too bad.
However, to run a pattern against such a large regexp and fail will take longer so I changed the inputs to have lots of randomly generated strings that won't match and then tried. 10000 strings none of which match the monster_regexp and I got this.
python /tmp/scratch.py 3.76s user 0.01s system 99% cpu 3.779 total
Similar to Noufal's solution, but returns the matched pattern or None.
import re
patterns = [
"Hi there, %s.",
"What a lovely day today!",
"Lovely sunset today, %s, isn't it",
"Will you be meeting %s today, %s?"
]
def make_re_pattern(pattern):
# characters like . ? etc. have special meaning in regular expressions.
# Escape the string to avoid interpretting them as differently.
# The re.escape function escapes even %, so replacing that with XXX to avoid that.
p = re.escape(pattern.replace("%s", "XXX"))
return p.replace("XXX", "\w+")
# Join all the pattens into a single regular expression.
# Each pattern is enclosed in () to remember the match.
# This will help us to find the matched pattern.
rx = re.compile("|".join("(" + make_re_pattern(p) + ")" for p in patterns))
def match(s):
"""Given an input strings, returns the matched pattern or None."""
m = rx.match(s)
if m:
# Find the index of the matching group.
index = (i for i, group in enumerate(m.groups()) if group is not None).next()
return patterns[index]
# Testing with couple of patterns
print match("Hi there, John.")
print match("Will you be meeting Linda today, John?")
Python solution. JS should be similar.
>>> re2.compile('^ABC(.*)E$').search('ABCDE') == None
False
>>> re2.compile('^ABC(.*)E$').search('ABCDDDDDDE') == None
False
>>> re2.compile('^ABC(.*)E$').search('ABX') == None
True
>>>
The trick is to use ^ and $ to bound your pattern and making it a "template". Use (.*) or (.+) or whatever it is that you want to "search" for.
The main bottleneck for you, imho, will be iterating through a list of these patterns. Regex searches are computationally expensive.
If you want a "does any pattern match" result, build a massive OR based regex and let your regex engine handle the 'OR'ing for you.
Also, if you have only prefix patterns, check out the TRIE data structure.
This could be a job for sscanf, there is an implementation in js: http://phpjs.org/functions/sscanf/; the function being copied is this: http://php.net/manual/en/function.sscanf.php.
You should be able to use it without changing the prepared strings much, but I have doubts about the performances.
the problem isn't clear to me. Do you want to take the patterns and build regexes out of it?
Most regex engines have a "quoted string" option. (\Q \E). So you could take the string and make it
^\QHi there,\E(?:.*)\Q.\E$
these will be regexes that match exactly the string you want outside your variables.
if you want to use a single regex to match just a single pattern, you can put them in grouped patterns to find out which one matched, but that will not give you EVERY match, just the first one.
if you use a proper parser (I've used PEG.js), it might be more maintainable though. So that's another option if you think you might get stuck in regex hell
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/"