I am looking for a way to match an optional ABC in the following strings.
Both strings should be matched either way, if ABC is there or not:
precedingstringwithundefinedlenghtABCsubsequentstringwithundefinedlength
precedingstringwithundefinedlenghtsubsequentstringwithundefinedlength
I've tried
.*(ABC).*
which doesn't work for an optional ABC but making ABC non greedy doesn't work either as the .* will take all the pride:
.*(ABC)?.*
This is NOT a duplicate to e.g. Regex Match all characters between two strings as I am looking for a certain string inbetween two random string, kind of the other way around.
You can use
.*(ABC).*|.*
This works like this:
.*(ABC).* pattern is searched for first, since it is the leftmost part of an alternation (see "Remember That The Regex Engine Is Eager"), it looks for any zero or more chars other than line break chars as many as possible, then captures ABC into Group 1 and then matches the rest of the line with the right-hand .*
| - or
.* - is searched for if the first alternation part does not match.
Another solution without the need to use alternation:
^(?:.*(ABC))?.*
See this regex demo. Details:
^ - start of string
(?:.*(ABC))? - an optional non-capturing group that matches zero or more chars other than line break chars as many as possible and then captures into Group 1 an ABC char sequence
.* - zero or more chars other than line break chars as many as possible.
I’ve come up with an answer myself:
Using the OR operator seems to work:
(?:(?:.*(ABC))|.*).*
If there’s a better way, feel free to answer and I will accept it.
You could use this regex: .*(ABC){0,1}.*. It means any, optional{min,max}, any. It is easier to read. I can' t say if your solution or mine is faster due to the processing speed.
Options:
{value} = n-times
{min,} = min to infinity
{min,max} = min to max
.+([ABC])?.+ should do the job
I have the following regex that validates the allowed characters:
^[a-zA-Z0-9-?\/:;(){}\[\]|`~´.\,'+÷ !##$£%^"&*_<>=àáâäçèéêëìíîïñòóôöùúûüýßÀÁÂÄÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÒÓÔÖÙÚÛÜÑ\\]*$
I need to modify it so that the string being validated:
may not begin with space or “/”
may not contain “//”
may not end with “/”
For the space at the beginning I have adapted it to
^[^\s][a-zA-Z0-9-?\\/:;(){}\\[\\]|`~´.\\,'+÷ !##$£%^\"&*_<>=àáâäçèéêëìíîïñòóôöùúûüýßÀÁÂÄÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÒÓÔÖÙÚÛÜÑ\\\\]*$
Not sure what to do about the other two requirements
For the second one I tried combining it with ^((?!//))*$ in various ways but to no success.
Note that ^((?!\/\/))*$ matches any empty string since the lookahead is a non-consuming pattern and here it always returns true.
[^\s] at the start of your pattern will match any chars other than whitespace chars, even those you did not specify in the character class.
You can use
^(?![\s/])(?!.*//)[a-zA-Z0-9?/:;(){}\[\]|`~´.,'+÷ !##$£%^\"&*_<>=àáâäçèéêëìíîïñòóôöùúûüýßÀÁÂÄÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÒÓÔÖÙÚÛÜÑ\\-]*$(?<!/)
See the regex demo. Details:
^(?![\s/])(?!.*//) - at the start of string, two checks are peformed:
(?![\s/]) - no whitespace or / allowed (right at the start)
(?!.*//) - no // allowed anywhere after zero or more chars other than line break chars, as many as possible
(?<!/) is the check after the end of string is hit, and it fails the match if the last char in string is /.
Note that in Java regex declarations, you do not need to escape / since regex delimiter notation is not used, and / itself is not a special regex metacharacter.
It seems like the following regexp should be enough and more simple: (?!.*//)^[^ /].*[^/]$
So at the beginning you can use negative lookahead to prevent occurence of // anywhere in the text. Then any character but space and / is accepted at the beginning, then anything can be present (besides // which was excluded by negative lookahead) and anything but / is accepted at the end.
Since 95% of the time the special conditions on the space and forward slash
will not occur, it might be better to take those two characters out of your
big class and handle them separately if and when they occur.
The big class can also be condensed to speed things up a bit.
^(?>[a-zA-Z0-9\\!-.:-#\[\]-`{-~£´ÄÖäö÷À-ÂÇ-ÏÑ-ÔÙ-Üß-âç-ïñ-ôù-ý]+|(?:/(?!/|$)|[ ])(?<!^.))*$
https://regex101.com/r/LpCwt6/1
^
(?>
[a-zA-Z0-9\\!-.:-#\[\]-`{-~£´ÄÖäö÷À-ÂÇ-ÏÑ-ÔÙ-Üß-âç-ïñ-ôù-ý]+
| (?:
/
(?! / | $ )
| [ ]
)
(?<! ^ . )
)*
$
And if you want to absorb all the class characters it can get very small.
^(?>[!-.0-~£´ÄÖäö÷À-ÂÇ-ÏÑ-ÔÙ-Üß-âç-ïñ-ôù-ý]+|(?:/(?!/|$)|[ ])(?<!^.))*$
https://regex101.com/r/EYdM5C/1
I am trying to use some regex to validate some input inside of Java code. I have been successful in implementing "basic" regex, but this one seems to be out of my scope of knowledge. I am working through RegEgg tutorials to learn more.
Here are the conditions that need to be validated:
Field will always have 8 characters
Can be all spaces
Or
Valid characters: a-zA-Z0-9 -!& or a space
Cannot begin with a space
If one of the special characters is used, it can be the only one used
Legal: "B-123---" "AB&& &" "A!!!!!!!"
Illegal: "B-123!!!" "AB&& -" "A-&! "
Has to have at least one alphanumeric character (Can't be all special characters ie: "!!!!!!!!"
This was my regex before additional validations were added:
^(\s{8}|[A-Za-z\-\!\&][ A-Za-z0-9\-\!\&]{7})$"
Then the additional validations for now allowing multiple of the special characters, and I am a bit stuck. I have been successful in using a positive lookahead, but stuck when trying to use the positive lookbehind. (I think the data before the lookbehind was consumed), but I am speculating as I am a neophyte with this part of regex.
using the or construct (a|b) is a large part of this, and you've begun applying it, so that's a good start.
You've made the rule that it can't start with a digit; nothing in the spec says this. also, - inside [] has special meaning, so escape it, or make sure it is first or last, because then you don't have to. That gets us to:
^(\s{8}|[A-Za-z0-9-!& -]{8})$
next up is the rule that it has to be all the same special character if used at all. Given that there are only 3 special characters, could be easier to just explicitly list them all:
^(\s{8}|[A-Za-z0-9 -]{8}|[A-Za-z0-9 !]{8}|[A-Za-z0-9 &]{8})$
Next up: Can't start with a space, and can't be all-special. Confirming the negative (that it ISNT all-special characters) gets complicated; lookahead seems like a better plan here. This:
^ is regexp-ese for: "Start of line". Note that this doesn't 'consume' a character. 1 is regexpese for 'only the exact character '1' will match here, nothinge else', but as it matches, it also 'consumes' that character, whereas ^ doesn't do that. 'start of line' is not a concept that can be consumed.
This notion of 'a match may fail, but if it succeeds, nothing is consumed' isn't limited to ^ and $; you can write your own:
(?=abc) will match if abc would match at this position, but does not consume it. Thus, the regexp ^(=abc)ab.d$ would match the input string abcd and nothing else. This is called positive lookahead. (it 'looks ahead' and matches if it sees the regular expression in the parens, failing if it does not).
(?!abc) is negative lookahead. It matches if it DOESNT see the thing in the parens. (?!abc)a.c will match the input adc but not the input abc.
(?<=abc) is positive lookbehind. It matches if the pattern you provide would match such that the match ends at the position you find yourself.
(?<!abc) is negative lookbehind.
Note that lookahead and lookbehind can be somewhat limited, in that they may not allow variable length patterns. But, fortunately, your requirements make it easy to limit ourselves to fixed size patterns here. Thus, we can introduce: (?![&!-]{8}) as a non-consuming unit in our regexp that will fail the match if we have all-8 special characters.
We can use this trick to fail on starting space too: (?! ) is all we need for that one.
Let's replace \s which is whitespace with just which is the space character (the problem description says 'space', not 'whitespace').
Putting it all together:
^( {8}|(?! )(?![&!-]{8})([A-Za-z0-9 -]{8}|[A-Za-z0-9 !]{8}|[A-Za-z0-9 &]{8}))$
Thats:
8 spaces, or...
not a space, and not all-8 special character, then,
any of the valid chars, any amount of spaces, and any amount of one of the 3 allowed special symbols, as long as we have precisely 8 of them...
.. OR the same thing as #3 but with the second of the three special symbols
.. OR with the third of the three.
Plug em in at regex101 along with your various examples of 'legal' and 'not legal' and you can play around with it some more.
NB: You can also use backreferences to attempt to solve the 'only one special character is allowed' part of this, but attempting to tackle the 'not all special characters' part seems quite unwieldy if you don't get to use (negative) lookahead.
Its a matter of asserting the right conditions at the start of the regex.
^(?=[ ]*$|(?![ ]))(?!.*([!&-]).*(?!\1)[!&-])[a-zA-Z0-9 !&-]{8}$
see -> https://regex101.com/r/tN5y4P/1
Some discussion:
^ # Begin of text
(?= # Assert, cannot start with a space
[ ]* $ # unless it's all spaces
| (?! [ ] )
)
(?! # Assert, not mixed special chars
.*
( [!&-] ) # (1)
.*
(?! \1 )
[!&-]
)
[a-zA-Z0-9 !&-]{8} # Consume 8 valid characters from within this class
$ # End of text
https://regex101.com/r/sB9wW6/1
(?:(?<=\s)|^)#(\S+) <-- the problem in positive lookbehind
Working like this on prod: (?:\s|^)#(\S+), but I need a correct start index (without space).
Here is in JS:
var regex = new RegExp(/(?:(?<=\s)|^)#(\S+)/g);
Error parsing regular expression: Invalid regular expression:
/(?:(?<=\s)|^)#(\S+)/
What am I doing wrong?
UPDATE
Ok, no lookbehind in JS :(
But anyways, I need a regex to get the proper start and end index of my match. Without leading space.
Make sure you always select the right regex engine at regex101.com. See an issue that occurred due to using a JS-only compatible regex with [^] construct in Python.
JS regex - at the time of answering this question - did not support lookbehinds. Now, it becomes more and more adopted after its introduction in ECMAScript 2018. You do not really need it here since you can use capturing groups:
var re = /(?:\s|^)#(\S+)/g;
var str = 's #vln1\n#vln2\n';
var res = [];
while ((m = re.exec(str)) !== null) {
res.push(m[1]);
}
console.log(res);
The (?:\s|^)#(\S+) matches a whitespace or the start of string with (?:\s|^), then matches #, and then matches and captures into Group 1 one or more non-whitespace chars with (\S+).
To get the start/end indices, use
var re = /(\s|^)#\S+/g;
var str = 's #vln1\n#vln2\n';
var pos = [];
while ((m = re.exec(str)) !== null) {
pos.push([m.index+m[1].length, m.index+m[0].length]);
}
console.log(pos);
BONUS
My regex works at regex101.com, but not in...
First of all, have you checked the Code Generator link in the Tools pane on the left?
All languages - "Literal string" vs. "String literal" alert - Make sure you test against the same text used in code, literal string, at the regex tester. A common scenario is copy/pasting a string literal value directly into the test string field, with all string escape sequences like \n (line feed char), \r (carriage return), \t (tab char). See Regex_search c++, for example. Mind that they must be replaced with their literal counterparts. So, if you have in Python text = "Text\n\n abc", you must use Text, two line breaks, abc in the regex tester text field. Text.*?abc will never match it although you might think it "works". Yes, . does not always match line break chars, see How do I match any character across multiple lines in a regular expression?
All languages - Backslash alert - Make sure you correctly use a backslash in your string literal, in most languages, in regular string literals, use double backslash, i.e. \d used at regex101.com must written as \\d. In raw string literals, use a single backslash, same as at regex101. Escaping word boundary is very important, since, in many languages (C#, Python, Java, JavaScript, Ruby, etc.), "\b" is used to define a BACKSPACE char, i.e. it is a valid string escape sequence. PHP does not support \b string escape sequence, so "/\b/" = '/\b/' there.
All languages - Default flags - Global and Multiline - Note that by default m and g flags are enabled at regex101.com. So, if you use ^ and $, they will match at the start and end of lines correspondingly. If you need the same behavior in your code check how multiline mode is implemented and either use a specific flag, or - if supported - use an inline (?m) embedded (inline) modifier. The g flag enables multiple occurrence matching, it is often implemented using specific functions/methods. Check your language reference to find the appropriate one.
line-breaks - Line endings at regex101.com are LF only, you can't test strings with CRLF endings, see regex101.com VS myserver - different results. Solutions can be different for each regex library: either use \R (PCRE, Java, Ruby) or some kind of \v (Boost, PCRE), \r?\n, (?:\r\n?|\n)/(?>\r\n?|\n) (good for .NET) or [\r\n]+ in other libraries (see answers for C#, PHP). Another issue related to the fact that you test your regex against a multiline string (not a list of standalone strings/lines) is that your patterns may consume the end of line, \n, char with negated character classes, see an issue like that. \D matched the end of line char, and in order to avoid it, [^\d\n] could be used, or other alternatives.
php - You are dealing with Unicode strings, or want shorthand character classes to match Unicode characters, too (e.g. \w+ to match Стрибижев or Stribiżew, or \s+ to match hard spaces), then you need to use u modifier, see preg_match() returns 0 although regex testers work - To match all occurrences, use preg_match_all, not preg_match with /...pattern.../g, see PHP preg_match to find multiple occurrences and "Unknown modifier 'g' in..." when using preg_match in PHP?- Your regex with inline backreference like \1 refuses to work? Are you using a double quoted string literal? Use a single-quoted one, see Backreference does not work in PHP
phplaravel - Mind you need the regex delimiters around the pattern, see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22430529
python - Note that re.search, re.match, re.fullmatch, re.findall and re.finditer accept the regex as the first argument, and the input string as the second argument. Not re.findall("test 200 300", r"\d+"), but re.findall(r"\d+", "test 200 300"). If you test at regex101.com, please check the "Code Generator" page. - You used re.match that only searches for a match at the start of the string, use re.search: Regex works fine on Pythex, but not in Python - If the regex contains capturing group(s), re.findall returns a list of captures/capture tuples. Either use non-capturing groups, or re.finditer, or remove redundant capturing groups, see re.findall behaves weird - If you used ^ in the pattern to denote start of a line, not start of the whole string, or used $ to denote the end of a line and not a string, pass re.M or re.MULTILINE flag to re method, see Using ^ to match beginning of line in Python regex
- If you try to match some text across multiple lines, and use re.DOTALL or re.S, or [\s\S]* / [\s\S]*?, and still nothing works, check if you read the file line by line, say, with for line in file:. You must pass the whole file contents as the input to the regex method, see Getting Everything Between Two Characters Across New Lines. - Having trouble adding flags to regex and trying something like pattern = r"/abc/gi"? See How to add modifers to regex in python?
c#, .net - .NET regex does not support possessive quantifiers like ++, *+, ??, {1,10}?, see .NET regex matching digits between optional text with possessive quantifer is not working - When you match against a multiline string and use RegexOptions.Multiline option (or inline (?m) modifier) with an $ anchor in the pattern to match entire lines, and get no match in code, you need to add \r? before $, see .Net regex matching $ with the end of the string and not of line, even with multiline enabled - To get multiple matches, use Regex.Matches, not Regex.Match, see RegEx Match multiple times in string - Similar case as above: splitting a string into paragraphs, by a double line break sequence - C# / Regex Pattern works in online testing, but not at runtime - You should remove regex delimiters, i.e. #"/\d+/" must actually look like #"\d+", see Simple and tested online regex containing regex delimiters does not work in C# code - If you unnecessarily used Regex.Escape to escape all characters in a regular expression (like Regex.Escape(#"\d+\.\d+")) you need to remove Regex.Escape, see Regular Expression working in regex tester, but not in c#
dartflutter - Use raw string literal, RegExp(r"\d"), or double backslashes (RegExp("\\d")) - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/59085824
javascript - Double escape backslashes in a RegExp("\\d"): Why do regex constructors need to be double escaped?
- (Negative) lookbehinds unsupported by most browsers: Regex works on browser but not in Node.js - Strings are immutable, assign the .replace result to a var - The .replace() method does change the string in place - Retrieve all matches with str.match(/pat/g) - Regex101 and Js regex search showing different results or, with RegExp#exec, RegEx to extract all matches from string using RegExp.exec- Replace all pattern matches in string: Why does javascript replace only first instance when using replace?
javascriptangular - Double the backslashes if you define a regex with a string literal, or just use a regex literal notation, see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/56097782
java - Word boundary not working? Make sure you use double backslashes, "\\b", see Regex \b word boundary not works - Getting invalid escape sequence exception? Same thing, double backslashes - Java doesn't work with regex \s, says: invalid escape sequence - No match found is bugging you? Run Matcher.find() / Matcher.matches() - Why does my regex work on RegexPlanet and regex101 but not in my code? - .matches() requires a full string match, use .find(): Java Regex pattern that matches in any online tester but doesn't in Eclipse - Access groups using matcher.group(x): Regex not working in Java while working otherwise - Inside a character class, both [ and ] must be escaped - Using square brackets inside character class in Java regex - You should not run matcher.matches() and matcher.find() consecutively, use only if (matcher.matches()) {...} to check if the pattern matches the whole string and then act accordingly, or use if (matcher.find()) to check if there is a single match or while (matcher.find()) to find multiple matches (or Matcher#results()). See Why does my regex work on RegexPlanet and regex101 but not in my code?
scala - Your regex attempts to match several lines, but you read the file line by line (e.g. use for (line <- fSource.getLines))? Read it into a single variable (see matching new line in Scala regex, when reading from file)
kotlin - You have Regex("/^\\d+$/")? Remove the outer slashes, they are regex delimiter chars that are not part of a pattern. See Find one or more word in string using Regex in Kotlin - You expect a partial string match, but .matchEntire requires a full string match? Use .find, see Regex doesn't match in Kotlin
mongodb - Do not enclose /.../ with single/double quotation marks, see mongodb regex doesn't work
c++ - regex_match requires a full string match, use regex_search to find a partial match - Regex not working as expected with C++ regex_match - regex_search finds the first match only. Use sregex_token_iterator or sregex_iterator to get all matches: see What does std::match_results::size return? - When you read a user-defined string using std::string input; std::cin >> input;, note that cin will only get to the first whitespace, to read the whole line properly, use std::getline(std::cin, input); - C++ Regex to match '+' quantifier - "\d" does not work, you need to use "\\d" or R"(\d)" (a raw string literal) - This regex doesn't work in c++ - Make sure the regex is tested against a literal text, not a string literal, see Regex_search c++
go - Double backslashes or use a raw string literal: Regular expression doesn't work in Go - Go regex does not support lookarounds, select the right option (Go) at regex101.com before testing! Regex expression negated set not working golang
groovy - Return all matches: Regex that works on regex101 does not work in Groovy
r - Double escape backslashes in the string literal: "'\w' is an unrecognized escape" in grep - Use perl=TRUE to PCRE engine ((g)sub/(g)regexpr): Why is this regex using lookbehinds invalid in R?
oracle - Greediness of all quantifiers is set by the first quantifier in the regex, see Regex101 vs Oracle Regex (then, you need to make all the quantifiers as greedy as the first one)] - \b does not work? Oracle regex does not support word boundaries at all, use workarounds as shown in Regex matching works on regex tester but not in oracle
firebase - Double escape backslashes, make sure ^ only appears at the start of the pattern and $ is located only at the end (if any), and note you cannot use more than 9 inline backreferences: Firebase Rules Regex Birthday
firebasegoogle-cloud-firestore - In Firestore security rules, the regular expression needs to be passed as a string, which also means it shouldn't be wrapped in / symbols, i.e. use allow create: if docId.matches("^\\d+$").... See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63243300
google-data-studio - /pattern/g in REGEXP_REPLACE must contain no / regex delimiters and flags (like g) - see How to use Regex to replace square brackets from date field in Google Data Studio?
google-sheets - If you think REGEXEXTRACT does not return full matches, truncates the results, you should check if you have redundant capturing groups in your regex and remove them, or convert the capturing groups to non-capturing by add ?: after the opening (, see Extract url domain root in Google Sheet
sed - Why does my regular expression work in X but not in Y?
word-boundarypcrephp - [[:<:]] and [[:>:]] do not work in the regex tester, although they are valid constructs in PCRE, see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/48670105
snowflake-cloud-data-platform snowflake-sql - If you are writing a stored procedure, and \\d does not work, you need to double them again and use \\\\d, see REGEX conversion of VARCHAR value to DATE in Snowflake stored procedure using RLIKE not consistent.
Using Java, i want to detect if a line starts with words and separator then "myword", but this regex takes too long. What is incorrect ?
^\s*(\w+(\s|/|&|-)*)*myword
The pattern ^\s*(\w+(\s|/|&|-)*)*myword is not efficient due to the nested quantifier. \w+ requires at least one word character and (\s|/|&|-)* can match zero or more of some characters. When the * is applied to the group and the input string has no separators in between word characters, the expression becomes similar to a (\w+)* pattern that is a classical catastrophical backtracking issue pattern.
Just a small illustration of \w+ and (\w+)* performance:
\w+: (\w+)*
You pattern is even more complicated and invloves more those backtracking steps. To avoid such issues, a pattern should not have optional subpatterns inside quantified groups. That is, create a group with obligatory subpatterns and apply the necessary quantifier to the group.
In this case, you can unroll the group you have as
String rx = "^\\s*(\\w+(?:[\\s/&-]+\\w+)*)[\\s/&-]+myword";
See IDEONE demo
Here, (\w+(\s|/|&|-)*)* is unrolled as (\w+(?:[\s/&-]+\w+)*) (I kept the outer parentheses to produce a capture group #1, you may remove these brackets if you are not interested in them). \w+ matches one or more word characters (so, it is an obligatory subpatter), and the (?:[\s/&-]+\w+)* subpattern matches zero or more (*, thus, this whole group is optional) sequences of one or more characters from the defined character class [\s/&-]+ (so, it is obligatory) followed with one or more word characters \w+.