Search Results

Search found 3804 results on 153 pages for 'regex'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 50/153 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • In C#, is there any way to try multiple Regexes on string to see which one matches first?

    - by Matt
    Let's say I have an arbitrary list of regexes (IList<Regex> lst; for example). Is there any way to find out which one matches first? Of course there is the straightforward solution of trying each one on the string and seeing which match has the lowest index, but this could be inefficient on long strings. Of course I can go back and pull the strings back out of each regex (Regex.ToString()) and concatenate them all together ("(regex1)|(regex2)|(regex3)"), but I find this to be an ugly solution, especially since it does not even indicate which regex was matched.

    Read the article

  • PHP preg_replace() pattern, string sanitization.

    - by Otar
    I have a regex email pattern and would like to strip all but pattern-matched characters from the string, in a short I want to sanitize string... I'm not a regex guru, so what I'm missing in regex? <?php $pattern = "/^([\w\!\#$\%\&\'\*\+\-\/\=\?\^\`{\|\}\~]+\.)*[\w\!\#$\%\&\'\*\+\-\/\=\?\^\`{\|\}\~]+@((((([a-z0-9]{1}[a-z0-9\-]{0,62}[a-z0-9]{1})|[a-z])\.)+[a-z]{2,6})|(\d{1,3}\.){3}\d{1,3}(\:\d{1,5})?)$/i"; $email = 'contact<>@domain.com'; // wrong email $sanitized_email = preg_replace($pattern, NULL, $email); echo $sanitized_email; // Should be [email protected] ?> Pattern taken from: http://fightingforalostcause.net/misc/2006/compare-email-regex.php (the very first one...)

    Read the article

  • getting names subgroups

    - by Abruzzo Forte e Gentile
    Hi All I am working with the new version of boost 1.42 and I want to use regex with named sub groups. Below an example. std::string line("match this here FIELD=VALUE in the middle"); boost::regex rgx("FIELD=(?\\w+)", boost::regex::perl ); boost::smatch thisMatch; boost::regex_searh( line, thisMatch, rgx ); Do you know how to get the content of the match ? The traditional way is std::string result( mtch["VAL"].first, mtch["VAL"].second ); but i don't want to use this way. I want to use the name of the subgroups as usual in Perl and in regex in general. I tried this, but it didn't work. std::string result( mtch["VAL"].first, mtch["VAL"].second ); Do you know how to get the value using the name of the subgroup? Thanks AFG

    Read the article

  • Regular Expression to match IP address + wildcard

    - by Ed Woodcock
    Hey guys I'm trying to use a RegularexpressionValidator to match an IP address (with possible wildcards) for an IP filtering system. I'm using the following Regex: "([0-9]{1,3}\\.|\\*\\.){3}([0-9]{1,3}|\\*){1}" Which works fine when running it in LINQPad with Regex.Matches, but doesn't seem to work when I'm using the validator. Does anyone have a suggestion as to either a better Regex or why it would work in test but not in situ? Cheers, Ed

    Read the article

  • Sed non greedy curly braces match

    - by Cesar
    I have a string in a file a.txt {moslate}alho{/moslate}otra{moslate}a{/moslate} a need to get the string otra using sed. With this regex sed 's|{moslate}.*{/moslate}||g' a.txt a get no output at all but when i add a ? to the regex s|{moslate}.*?{/moslate}||g a.txt (I've read somewhere that it makes the regex non-greedy) i get no match at all, i mean a get the following output {moslate}alho{/moslate}otra{moslate}a{/moslate} How can i get the required output using sed?

    Read the article

  • preg_match() Unknown modifier '[' help

    - by Jonathan
    Hi, I have this regex for getting the YouTube video ID: (?<=v=)[a-zA-Z0-9-]+(?=&)|(?<=[0-9]/)[^&\n]+|(?<=v=)[^&\n]+ I get it from there: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2597080/regex-to-parse-youtube-yid The problem is I get preg_match() Unknown modifier '[' warning. I know I have to enclose the regex delimiters but I have no idea how to do this. Any help?

    Read the article

  • .NET Regular Expressions - Shorter match

    - by Xavier
    Hi Guys, I have a question regarding .NET regular expressions and how it defines matches. I am writing: var regex = new Regex("<tr><td>1</td><td>(.+)</td><td>(.+)</td>"); if (regex.IsMatch(str)) { var groups = regex.Match(str).Groups; var matches = new List<string>(); for (int i = 1; i < groups.Count; i++) matches.Add(groups[i].Value); return matches; } What I want is get the content of the two following tags. Instead it returns: [0]: Cell 1</td><td>Cell 2</td>... [1]: Last row of the table Why is the first match taking </td> and the rest of the string instead of stopping at </td>?

    Read the article

  • Is there a more concise regular expression to accomplish this task?

    - by mpminnich
    First off, sorry for the lame title, but I couldn't think of a better one. I need to test a password to ensure the following: Passwords must contain at least 3 of the following: upper case letters lower case letters numbers special characters Here's what I've come up with (it works, but I'm wondering if there is a better way to do this): Dim lowerCase As New Regex("[a-z]") Dim upperCase As New Regex("[A-Z]") Dim numbers As New Regex("\d") Dim special As New Regex("[\\\.\+\*\?\^\$\[\]\(\)\|\{\}\/\'\#]") Dim count As Int16 = 0 If Not lowerCase.IsMatch(txtUpdatepass.Text) Then count += 1 End If If Not upperCase.IsMatch(txtUpdatepass.Text) Then count += 1 End If If Not numbers.IsMatch(txtUpdatepass.Text) Then count += 1 End If If Not special.IsMatch(txtUpdatepass.Text) Then count += 1 End If If at least 3 of the criteria have not been met, I handle it. I'm not well versed in regular expressions and have been reading numerous tutorials on the web. Is there a way to combine all 4 regexes into one? But I guess doing that would not allow me to check if at least 3 of the criteria are met. On a side note, is there a site that has an exhaustive list of all characters that would need to be escaped in the regex (those that have special meaning - eg. $, ^, etc.)? As always, TIA. I can't express enough how awesome I think this site is.

    Read the article

  • Extracting data from a text file to use in a python script?

    - by Rob
    Basically, I have a file like this: Url/Host: www.example.com Login: user Password: password How can I use RegEx to separate the details to place them into variables? Sorry if this is a terrible question, I can just never grasp RegEx. So another question would be, can you provide the RegEx, but kind of explain what each part of it is for?

    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

  • .htaccess 301 redirect with regex?

    - by Eddie ZA
    How to do this with regular expression? Old -> New http://www.example.com/1.html -> http://www.example.com/dir/1.html http://www.example.com/2.html -> http://www.example.com/dir/2.html http://www.example.com/3.asp -> http://www.example.com/dir/3.html http://www.example.com/4.asp -> http://www.example.com/dir/4.html http://www.example.com/4_a.html -> http://www.example.com/dir/sub/4-a.html http://www.example.com/4_b.html -> http://www.example.com/dir/sub/4-b.html I've tried this: Redirect 301 /1.html http://www.example.com/dir/1.html Redirect 301 /2.html http://www.example.com/dir/2.html Redirect 301 /3.asp http://www.example.com/dir/3.html Redirect 301 /4.asp http://www.example.com/dir/4.html Redirect 301 /4_a.html http://www.example.com/dir/sub/4-a.html Redirect 301 /4_b.html http://www.example.com/dir/sub/4-b.html

    Read the article

  • 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

  • URL Rewrite 2.0 Performance

    - by The Official Microsoft IIS Site
    Do performance work it is easy when you have the right tools for measuring gains or lost. I will share some thoughts about how to improve performance during rewriting, but please keep in mind that any change you do must be well thought and with performance Read More......( read more ) Read More......(read more)

    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

  • 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

  • Regular Expressions Cookbook Ebook Deal of the Day

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    Every day O’Reilly has an “ebook deal of the day” offering one or a bunch of their books in electronic format for only $9.99. Twice this year I received an email from O’Reilly notifying me that Regular Expressions Cookbook was on sale. But each time the email was sent on the morning of the day itself. When it’s morning in California it’s already bedtime for me here in Thailand. So I never saw the emails until the next day, making it rather pointless to blog about the deal. But this time O’Reilly has listened to my request for advance notification. I just got an email this morning saying Regular Expressions Cookbook will be part of the Ebook Deal of the Day for 15 September 2010. That’s 15 September on the US west coast. When I write this there’s a few hours to go before the deal starts at one past midnight California time. You can get any O’Reilly Cookbook as an ebook for only $9.99. The normal price for Regular Expressons Cookbook as an ebook is $31.99. The download includes the book in PDF, ePub, Mobi (for Kindle), DAISY, and Android formats.

    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 Code Samples

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    %COOKBOOKFRAME% One of the common criticisms against the first edition was that we didn’t have the regular expressions and code samples available for download. Since our book only has very short code snippets rather than complete programs, we (the authors) did not have these available as separate files either. But for the second edition we’re trying to do better. You can now download the code samples from the 2nd edition of Regular Expressions Cookbook. This HTML file contains all the blocks with regular expressions and source code from the book, along with the titles of the chapters, recipes, and sections that they are found in. If you have purchased the book, you can use this file to easily copy and paste the regular expressions and source code snippets. Even if you purchased the ebook, you may prefer to use this file. The regexes in the ebook are formatted with line breaks and gray dots for spaces to make them easier to read in print. The HTML file does not use such formatting, so you can copy and paste them directly. This means that some very regexes will run beyond the edge of your browser window.

    Read the article

  • PerlRegEx vs RegularExpressionsCore Delphi Units

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    The RegularExpressionsCore unit that is part of Delphi XE is based on the latest class-based PerlRegEx unit that I developed. Embarcadero only made a few changes to the unit. These changes are insignificant enough that code written for earlier versions of Delphi using the class-based PerlRegEx unit will work just the same with Delphi XE. The unit was renamed from PerlRegEx to RegularExpressionsCore. When migrating your code to Delphi XE, you can choose whether you want to use the new RegularExpressionsCore unit or continue using the PerlRegEx unit in your application. All you need to change is which unit you add to the uses clause in your own units. Indentation and line breaks in the code were changed to match the style used in the Delphi RTL and VCL code. This does not change the code, but makes it harder to diff the two units. Literal strings in the unit were separated into their own unit called RegularExpressionsConsts. These strings are only used for error messages that indicate bugs in your code. If your code uses TPerlRegEx correctly then the user should not see any of these strings. My code uses assertions to check for out of bounds parameters, while Embarcadero uses exceptions. Again, if you use TPerlRegEx correctly, you should never get any assertions or exceptions. The Compile method raises an exception if the regular expression is invalid in both my original TPerlRegEx component and Embarcadero’s version. If your code allows the user to provide the regular expression, you should explicitly call Compile and catch any exceptions it raises so you can tell the user there is a problem with the regular expression. Even with user-provided regular expressions, you shouldn’t get any other assertions or exceptions if your code is correct. Note that Embarcadero owns all the rights to their RegularExpressionsCore unit. Like all the other RTL and VCL units, this unit cannot be distributed by myself or anyone other than Embarcadero. I do retain the rights to my original PerlRegEx unit which I will continue to make available for those using older versions of Delphi.

    Read the article

  • RegEx-Based Finding and Replacing of Text in SSMS

    So often, one sees developers doing repetitive coding in SQL Server Management Studio or Visual Studio that could be made much quicker and easier by using the Regular-Expression-based Find/Replace functionality. It is understandable, since the syntax is odd and some features are missing, but it is still worth knowing about. The Future of SQL Server Monitoring "Being web-based, SQL Monitor 2.0 enables you to check on your servers from almost any location" Jonathan Allen.Try SQL Monitor now.

    Read the article

  • Excel Regex, or export to Python? ; "Vlookup" in Python?

    - by victorhooi
    heya, We have an Excel file with a worksheet containing people records. 1. Phone Number Sanitation One of the fields is a phone number field, which contains phone numbers in the format e.g.: +XX(Y)ZZZZ-ZZZZ (where X, Y and Z are integers). There are also some records which have less digits, e.g.: +XX(Y)ZZZ-ZZZZ And others with really screwed up formats: +XX(Y)ZZZZ-ZZZZ / ZZZZ or: ZZZZZZZZ We need to sanitise these all into the format: 0YZZZZZZZZ (or OYZZZZZZ with those with less digits). 2. Fill in Supervisor Details Each person also has a supervisor, given as an numeric ID. We need to do a lookup to get the name and email address of that supervisor, and add it to the line. This lookup will be firstly on the same worksheet (i.e. searching itself), and it can then fallback to another workbook with more people. 3. Approach? For the first issue, I was thinking of using regex in Excel/VBA somehow, to do the parsing. My Excel-fu isn't the best, but I suppose I can learn...lol. Any particular points on this one? However, would I be better off exporting the XLS to a CSV (e.g. using xlrd), then using Python to fix up the phone numbers? For the second approach, I was thinking of just using vlookups in Excel, to pull in the data, and somehow, having it fall through, first on searching itself, then on the external workbook, then just putting in error text. Not sure how to do that last part. However, if I do happen to choose to export to CSV and do it in Python, what's an efficient way of doing the vlookup? (Should I convert to a dict, or just iterate? Or is there a better, or more idiomatic way?) Cheers, Victor

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >