Search Results

Search found 6743 results on 270 pages for 'regular joe'.

Page 4/270 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Second Edition of Regular Expressions Cookbook Has Been Published

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    %COOKBOOKFRAME% The first edition of Regular Expressions Cookbook was published in May of 2009. It quickly became a bestseller, briefly holding the #1 spot in computer books on Amazon.com. It also had staying power. The ebook version was O’Reilly’s top seller during the whole year of 2010. So it’s no surprise that our editor at O’Reilly soon contacted us for a second edition. With Steven and I always being very busy, those plans were delayed until finally both of us found the time to update the book. Work started in January. Today you can buy your own copy of the second edition of Regular Expressions Cookbook. O’Reilly’s online shop sells the eBook in DRM-free ePub, Mobi, and PDF formats for $39.99 and the print version for $49.99. These are the list prices for the eBook and the print book. If you’re looking for a discount and free shipping of the print book, you can pre-order on one of the various Amazon sites. Deliveries should start soon. The discount rates differ and are subject to change. Amazon will also pay me an affiliate commission if you use one of these links, which pretty much doubles the income I get from the book. Amazon.com. Free shipping to the USA. Amazon.co.uk. Free shipping to the UK and Ireland. Amazon.fr. Free shipping to France, Monaco, Luxembourg, and Belgium. Amazon.de. Free shipping to Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Belgium, and The Netherlands. If you don’t want to wait for the print book to arrive, the Kindle edition is already available for instant delivery. The Kindle edition works on Amazon’s Kindle hardware, and on PCs via Amazon’s Kindle software (free download). Amazon.com Amazon.co.uk Amazon.fr Amazon.de I’ll blog more about the book in the coming days and weeks with details about what’s new in the second edition.

    Read the article

  • Second Edition of Regular Expressions Cookbook Now In Stock at Amazon.com

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    %COOKBOOKFRAME% The second edition of Regular Expressions Cookbook is now in stock as a printed book Amazon.com. Right now, the printed book is discounted 45% to $27.51, which is actually more than a dollar cheaper than the Kindle edition. The European Amazon sites don’t have the printed book in stock yet. But it shouldn’t take too long for the book to make it from the US to Europe. They do have the Kindle edition.

    Read the article

  • Regular Expressions Cookbook Is in The Money—Win a Copy

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    %COOKBOOKFRAME%You may have heard some people say that most book authors never get any royalties. That’s not true because most authors get an advance royalty that is paid before the book is published. That’s the author’s main incentive for writing the book, at least as far as money is concerned. (If money is your main concern, don’t write books.) What is true is that most authors never see any money beyond the advance royalty. Royalty rates are very low. A 10% royalty of the publisher’s price is considered normal. The publisher’s price is usually 45% of the retail price. So if you pay full price in a bookstore, the author gets 4.5% of your money. If there’s more than one author, they split the royalty. It doesn’t take a math degree to figure out that a book needs to sell quite a few copies for the royalty to add up to a meaningful amount of money. But Steven and I must have done something right. Regular Expressions Cookbook is in the money. My royalty statement for the 3rd quartier of 2009, which is the 2nd quarter that the book was on the market, came with a check. I actually received it last month but didn’t get around to blogging about. The amount of the check is insignificant. The point is that the balance is no longer negative. I’m taking this opportunity to pat myself and my co-author on the back. To celebrate the occassion O’Reilly has offered to sponsor a give-away of five (5) copies of Regular Expressions Cookbook. These are the rules of the game: You must post a comment to this blog article including your actual name and actual email address. Names are published, email addresses are not. Comments are moderated by myself (Jan Goyvaerts). If I consider a comment to be offensive or spam it will not be published and not be eligible for any prize. If you don’t know what to say in the comment, just wish me a happy 100000nd birthday, so I don’t have to feel so bad about entering the 6-bit era. Each person commenting has only one chance to win, regardless of the number of comments posted. O’Reilly will be provided with the names and email addresses of the winners (and those email addresses only) in order to arrange delivery. Each winner can choose to receive a printed copy or ebook (DRM-free PDF). If you choose the printed book, O’Reilly pays for shipping to anywhere in the world but not for any duties or taxes your country may impose on books imported from the USA. If you choose the ebook, you’ll need to create an O’Reilly account that is then granted access to the PDF download. You can make your choice after you’ve won, so it doesn’t influence your chance of winning. Contest ends 28 February 2010, GMT+7 (Thai time). Chosen by five calls to Random(78)+1 in Delphi 2010, the winners are: 48: Xiaozu 45: David Chisholm 19: Miquel Burns 33: Aaron Rice 17: David Laing Thanks to everybody who participated. The winners have been notified by email on how to collect their prize.

    Read the article

  • Understanding Regular Expressions (focus on URL Rewrite)–Part 11 (Sub-Part 2 of 2)

    - by OWScott
    This 2nd part (out of 2) on Regular Expressions covers the remaining tips necessary to get up to speed on a topic that at first seems daunting, but really isn’t that bad. Whether you use Regular Expressions for URL Rewrite, Visual Studio, PowerShell, programming or any other tool, these tips will allow you to understand the essentials of Regular Expressions. Be sure to watch Part 1 first. This is week 11 of a 52 week series on various web administration related tasks. Past and future videos can be found here.

    Read the article

  • XRegExp Regular Expression Library for JavaScript

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    XRegExp is an open source JavaScript library. It extends JavaScript’s regex syntax with features such as free-spacing, named capture, mode modifiers, and Unicode categories, blocks, and scripts. It also provides its own test(), exec(), forEach(), replace(), and split() methods that eliminate most cross-browser inconstencies and bugs. Anyone using non-trivial regexes in their JavaScript code should seriously consider using XRegExp. Last month’s update of the Regular-Expressions.info website added full coverage of XRegExp to the regex tutorial and regex reference sections. But the tools & languages section was missing the XRegExp page, resulting in broken links in the tutorial and reference sections. This page has now been added.

    Read the article

  • Use regular expressions to match an ? but not a \?

    - by J.Milly
    I have a PHP regular expression that has been functioning fairly well to parse some odd legacy client templates until recently when we found an escaped question mark (\?) included in a template expression. I'm not strong enough with my regular expression-fu to wrap my feeble noodle around a negative look ahead or some techno-mumbo-jumbo so, tips or points in the right direction would be greatly appreciated. My PHP: preg_match_all("/\{\{IF (.*)\?(.*):(.*)\}\}/U", $template, $m, PREG_SET_ORDER);

    Read the article

  • regular expression to insert space beetween thousands and hundreds...

    - by pixelboy
    Regular expressions and I aren't quite good friends. So here's the really basic operation i'm trying to do using javascript (jQuery framwork that is). My calculation function return a number, unformated, and i'd like to separate thousands and hundreds by a white space ' '. I'm sure it's pretty easy for a regexp regular user... but for me... Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

  • New regular expression features in PCRE 8.34 and 8.35

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    PCRE 8.34 adds some new regex features and changes the behavior of a few to make it better compatible with the latest versions of Perl. There are no changes to the regex syntax in PCRE 8.35. \o{377} is now an octal escape just like \377. This syntax was first introduced in Perl 5.12. It avoids any confusion between octal escapes and backreferences. It also allows octal numbers beyond 377 to be used. E.g. \o{400} is the same as \x{100}. If you have any reason to use octal escapes instead of hexadecimal escapes then you should definitely use the new syntax. Because of this change, \o is now an error when it doesn’t form a valid octal escape. Previously \o was a literal o and \o{377} was a sequence of 337 o‘s. In free-spacing mode, whitespace between a quantifier and the ? that makes it lazy or the + that makes it possessive is now ignored. In Perl this has always been the case. In PCRE 8.33 and prior, whitespace ended a quantifier and any following ? or + was seen as a second quantifier and thus an error. The shorthand \s now matches the vertical tab character in addition to the other whitespace characters it previously matched. Perl 5.18 made the same change. Many other regex flavors have always included the vertical tab in \s, just like POSIX has always included it in [[:space:]]. Names of capturing groups are no longer allowed to start with a digit. This has always been the case in Perl since named groups were added to Perl 5.10. PCRE 8.33 and prior even allowed group names to consist entirely of digits. [[:<:]] and [[::]] are now treated as POSIX-style word boundaries. They match at the start and the end of a word. Though they use similar syntax, these have nothing to do with POSIX character classes and cannot be used inside character classes. Perl does not support POSIX word boundaries. The same changes affect PHP 5.5.10 (and later) and R 3.0.3 (and later) as they have been updated to use PCRE 8.34. RegexBuddy and RegexMagic have been updated to support the latest versions of PCRE, PHP, and R. Older versions that were previously supported are still supported, so you can compare or convert your regular expressions between the latest versions of PCRE, PHP, and R and whichever version you were using previously.

    Read the article

  • Text editor capable of running complex Regular Expressions?

    - by Mashimom
    I want to find a text editor capable of running and mainly storing regular expressions for later re-use. It should also be able to run them across multiple files. I know I can get all that with grep, but there is not much for re-use on it. I was able to get some regular expression functionality on Gedit with plugins, but not nearly close to my needs. There is EditPad Pro for Windows (runs on wine) but native is always better :)

    Read the article

  • Perl like regular expression in Oracle DB

    - by user13136722
    There's regular expression support in Oracle DB Using Regular Expressions in Database Applications Oracle SQL PERL-Influenced Extensions to POSIX Standard But '\b' is not supported which I believe is quite wideliy used in perl and/or other tools perlre - perldoc.perl.org \b Match a word boundary So, I experimented with '\W' which is non-"word" character When combined with beginning-of-line and end-of-line like below, I think it works exactly the same as '\b' SELECT * FROM TAB1 WHERE regexp_like(TEXTCOL1, '(^|\W)a_word($|\W)', 'i')

    Read the article

  • Regular Expression for any number divisible by 60 using C# .Net ?

    - by Steve Johnson
    Hi there, I need to apply validation on input time intervals that are taken in as seconds. Now i am not really good at Regular expressions. So can any body help making a regular expression that can test whether a number is divisible by 60. I was wondering if i could use to test one that check that the number is divisible by 10 and then check whether the same is divisible by 6. For number divisible by 10 here [\d*0] is the expression i guess. Please correct me if i am wrong. Hope somebody solves my problem. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Can you use back references in the pattern part of a regular expression?

    - by Camsoft
    I there a way to back reference in the regular expression pattern? Example input string: Here is "quoted text" some quoted text. Say I want to pull out the quoted text, I could create the following expression: "([^"]+)" This regular expression would match quoted text. Say I want it to also support single quotes, I could change the expression to: ["']([^"']+)["'] But what if the input string has a mixture of quotes say Here is 'quoted text" some quoted text. I would not want the regex to match. Currently the regex in the second example would still match. What I would like to be able to do is if the first quote is a double quote then the closing quote must be a double. And if the start quote is single quote then the closing quote must be single. Can I use a back reference to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • List of events triggered on pages matching regex

    - by Cubius
    Is there a way to get the grouped list of events (such as in Top events) which were triggered on pages matching a regular expression? I may add the Page secondary dimension in Top events and apply the regex filter but this way I won't get a grouped list. I may apply the filter to Events - Pages report but this way the events will be grouped only inside pages whilst I need global grouping. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Understanding Regular Expressions (focus on URL Rewrite)–Part 10 (Sub-Part 1 of 2)

    - by OWScott
    Regular Expressions can seem difficult to understand.  In today’s lesson I attempt to bring this down to earth and make it understandable and useful for the web administrator.  While this focuses on URL Rewrite, this lesson is useful for Visual Studio, ASP.NET development and JavaScript development also. I couldn’t keep this within 10-15 minutes so this is Part 1 of 2 on Regular Expressions. This is week 10 of a 52 week series on various web administration related tasks.  Past and future videos can be found here.

    Read the article

  • Using lookahead assertions in regular expressions

    - by Greg Jackson
    I use regular expressions on a daily basis, as my daily work is 90% in Perl (legacy codebase, but that's a different issue). Despite this, I still find lookahead and lookbehind to be terribly confusing and often unreadable. Right now, if I were to get a code review with a lookahead or lookbehind, I would immediately send it back to see if the problem can be solved by using multiple regular expressions or a different approach. The following are the main reasons I tend not to like them: They can be terribly unreadable. Lookahead assertions, for example, start from the beginning of the string no matter where they are placed. That, among other things, can cause some very "interesting" and non-obvious behaviors. It used to be the case that many languages didn't support lookahead/lookbehind (or supported them as "experimental features"). This isn't the case quite as much, but there's still always the question as to how well it's supported. Quite frankly, they feel like a dirty hack. Regexps often already are, but they can also be quite elegant, and have gained widespread acceptance. I've gotten by without any need for them at all... sometimes I think that they're extraneous. Now, I'll freely admit that especially the last two reasons aren't really good ones, but I felt that I should enumerate what goes through my mind when I see one. I'm more than willing to change my mind about them, but I feel that they violate some of my core tenets of programming, including: Code should be as readable as possible without sacrificing functionality -- this may include doing something in a less efficient, but clearer was as long as the difference is negligible or unimportant to the application as a whole. Code should be maintainable -- if another programmer comes along to fix my code, non-obvious behavior can hide bugs or make functional code appear buggy (see readability) "The right tool for the right job" -- I'm sure you can come up with contrived examples that could use lookahead, but I've never come across something that really needs them in my real-world development work. Is there anything that they're really the best tool for, as opposed to, say, multiple regexps (or, alternatively, are they the best tool for most cases they're used for today). My question is this: Is it good practice to use lookahead/lookbehind in regular expressions, or are they simply a hack that have found their way into modern production code? I'd be perfectly happy to be convinced that I'm wrong about this, and simple examples are useful for examples or illustration, but by themselves, won't be enough to convince me.

    Read the article

  • Finding the html tag value with Python [on hold]

    - by MrWho
    Consider a html page, which contains a line like below: file: 'http://google.com/video.mp4' I want to search for google.com/video.mp4 in that file and save it in a variable.I want to code it with python. Shortly, I want to elicit a link from a html page, so I need to get the link by using regular expressions or the other techniques in which I'm asking about. PS: What should I exactly try to clarify?it's really annoying that the administrators don't even say what is exactly unclear about the question, they've just learned to close or on hold the topics!

    Read the article

  • Building a regex builder

    - by i.h4d35
    I am a beginner in programming in general and web development in particular. I am especially bad at regular expressions. Recently I was involved in building a couple of cPanel plugins(Perl-CGI) and that's when I realized how bad I am in regex. As a result, I have decided to build an online regex builder - this will help me to learn regex and help other struggling with regex. I have checked out GSkinner, Rubular and a couple of others like regexpal. It seemed to be a little difficult to use, hence i thought of writing another one. I do not know which tool is best suited for the job. should I write it in Perl or Python? My skill level is between beginner and intermediate in both those languages. What would be a good starting point - building it for the CLI or for the browser? I plan to get a string as an input, ask if the user want to search or search and replace, enter the search string (and the replace string where applicable) and then generate a regex. Would this be the right way to go?

    Read the article

  • Helper method to Replace/Remove characters that do not match the Regular Expression

    - by Michael Freidgeim
    I have a few fields, that use regEx for validation. In case if provided field has unaccepted characters, I don't want to reject the whole field, as most of validators do, but just remove invalid characters. I am expecting to keep only Character Classes for allowed characters and created a helper method to strip unaccepted characters. The allowed pattern should be in Regex format, expect them wrapped in square brackets. function will insert a tilde after opening squere bracket , according to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4460290/replace-chars-if-not-match.  [^ ] at the start of a character class negates it - it matches characters not in the class.I anticipate that it could work not for all RegEx describing valid characters sets,but it works for relatively simple sets, that we are using.         /// <summary>               /// Replaces  not expected characters.               /// </summary>               /// <param name="text"> The text.</param>               /// <param name="allowedPattern"> The allowed pattern in Regex format, expect them wrapped in brackets</param>               /// <param name="replacement"> The replacement.</param>               /// <returns></returns>               /// //        http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4460290/replace-chars-if-not-match.               //http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6154426/replace-remove-characters-that-do-not-match-the-regular-expression-net               //[^ ] at the start of a character class negates it - it matches characters not in the class.               //Replace/Remove characters that do not match the Regular Expression               static public string ReplaceNotExpectedCharacters( this string text, string allowedPattern,string replacement )              {                     allowedPattern = allowedPattern.StripBrackets( "[", "]" );                      //[^ ] at the start of a character class negates it - it matches characters not in the class.                      var result = Regex .Replace(text, @"[^" + allowedPattern + "]", replacement);                      return result;              }static public string RemoveNonAlphanumericCharacters( this string text)              {                      var result = text.ReplaceNotExpectedCharacters(NonAlphaNumericCharacters, "" );                      return result;              }        public const string NonAlphaNumericCharacters = "[a-zA-Z0-9]";There are a couple of functions from my StringHelper class  http://geekswithblogs.net/mnf/archive/2006/07/13/84942.aspx , that are used here.    //                           /// <summary>               /// 'StripBrackets checks that starts from sStart and ends with sEnd (case sensitive).               ///           'If yes, than removes sStart and sEnd.               ///           'Otherwise returns full string unchanges               ///           'See also MidBetween               /// </summary>               /// <param name="str"></param>               /// <param name="sStart"></param>               /// <param name="sEnd"></param>               /// <returns></returns>               public static string StripBrackets( this string str, string sStart, string sEnd)              {                      if (CheckBrackets(str, sStart, sEnd))                     {                           str = str.Substring(sStart.Length, (str.Length - sStart.Length) - sEnd.Length);                     }                      return str;              }               public static bool CheckBrackets( string str, string sStart, string sEnd)              {                      bool flag1 = (str != null ) && (str.StartsWith(sStart) && str.EndsWith(sEnd));                      return flag1;              }               public static string WrapBrackets( string str, string sStartBracket, string sEndBracket)              {                      StringBuilder builder1 = new StringBuilder(sStartBracket);                     builder1.Append(str);                     builder1.Append(sEndBracket);                      return builder1.ToString();              }v

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >