Develop Reference

Can a regex expression on javascript be started with an exclamation mark?

Okay so let me be clear about this, I have a user interface where a user can search for products based on their product title, and the way it's built is that you don't need to type the full exact title to get a match. Basically under the hood it uses '$regex' operator on the find method, so if I type /banana/ it retrieves any product that contains on the title the word banana.
The good part of this is that if I type:
/^((?!banana).)*$/
It negates it, and returns any product that doesn't contain the word banana.
What I am trying to achieve is giving the negation feature to the user on a more friendly way instead of using the whole regex above.
So I thought about telling the user to use exclamation mark on the start of text and then under the hood replace it by this regex wrapper /^((?!banana).)*$/ . The problem is that I will lose functionality if there is any valid regex that starts by exclamation mark, because I will always be replacing the search tag with the negation wrapper. Does it make sense?
Thank you

Partial matching a string against a regex

Suppose that I have this regular expression: /abcd/
Suppose that I wanna check the user input against that regex and disallow entering invalid characters in the input. When user inputs "ab", it fails as an match for the regex, but I can't disallow entering "a" and then "b" as user can't enter all 4 characters at once (except for copy/paste). So what I need here is a partial match which checks if an incomplete string can be potentially a match for a regex.
Java has something for this purpose: .hitEnd() (described here http://glaforge.appspot.com/article/incomplete-string-regex-matching) python doesn't do it natively but has this package that does the job: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/regex.
I didn't find any solution for it in js. It's been asked years ago: Javascript RegEx partial match
and even before that: Check if string is a prefix of a Javascript RegExp
P.S. regex is custom, suppose that the user enters the regex herself and then tries to enter a text that matches that regex. The solution should be a general solution that works for regexes entered at runtime.

Looks like you're lucky, I've already implemented that stuff in JS (which works for most patterns - maybe that'll be enough for you). See my answer here. You'll also find a working demo there.
There's no need to duplicate the full code here, I'll just state the overall process:
Parse the input regex, and perform some replacements. There's no need for error handling as you can't have an invalid pattern in a RegExp object in JS.
Replace abc with (?:a|$)(?:b|$)(?:c|$)
Do the same for any "atoms". For instance, a character group [a-c] would become (?:[a-c]|$)
Keep anchors as-is
Keep negative lookaheads as-is
Had JavaScript have more advanced regex features, this transformation may not have been possible. But with its limited feature set, it can handle most input regexes. It will yield incorrect results on regex with backreferences though if your input string ends in the middle of a backreference match (like matching ^(\w+)\s+\1$ against hello hel).

As many have stated there is no standard library, fortunately I have written a Javascript implementation that does exactly what you require. With some minor limitation it works for regular expressions supported by Javascript.
see: incr-regex-package.
Further there is also a react component that uses this capability to provide some useful capabilities:
Check input as you type
Auto complete where possible
Make suggestions for possible input values
Demo of the capabilities Demo of use

I think that you have to have 2 regex one for typing /a?b?c?d?/ and one for testing at end while paste or leaving input /abcd/
This will test for valid phone number:
const input = document.getElementById('input')
let oldVal = ''
input.addEventListener('keyup', e => {
if (/^\d{0,3}-?\d{0,3}-?\d{0,3}$/.test(e.target.value)){
oldVal = e.target.value
} else {
e.target.value = oldVal
}
})
input.addEventListener('blur', e => {
console.log(/^\d{3}-?\d{3}-?\d{3}-?$/.test(e.target.value) ? 'valid' : 'not valid')
})
<input id="input">
And this is case for name surname
const input = document.getElementById('input')
let oldVal = ''
input.addEventListener('keyup', e => {
if (/^[A-Z]?[a-z]*\s*[A-Z]?[a-z]*$/.test(e.target.value)){
oldVal = e.target.value
} else {
e.target.value = oldVal
}
})
input.addEventListener('blur', e => {
console.log(/^[A-Z][a-z]+\s+[A-Z][a-z]+$/.test(e.target.value) ? 'valid' : 'not valid')
})
<input id="input">

This is the hard solution for those who think there's no solution at all: implement the python version (https://bitbucket.org/mrabarnett/mrab-regex/src/4600a157989dc1671e4415ebe57aac53cfda2d8a/regex_3/regex/_regex.c?at=default&fileviewer=file-view-default) in js. So it is possible. If someone has simpler answer he'll win the bounty.
Example using python module (regular expression with back reference):
$ pip install regex
$ python
>>> import regex
>>> regex.Regex(r'^(\w+)\s+\1$').fullmatch('abcd ab',partial=True)
<regex.Match object; span=(0, 7), match='abcd ab', partial=True>

You guys would probably find this page of interest:
(https://github.com/desertnet/pcre)
It was a valiant effort: make a WebAssembly implementation that would support PCRE. I'm still playing with it, but I suspect it's not practical. The WebAssembly binary weighs in at ~300K; and if your JS terminates unexpectedly, you can end up not destroying the module, and consequently leaking significant memory.
The bottom line is: this is clearly something the ECMAscript people should be formalizing, and browser manufacturers should be furnishing (kudos to the WebAssembly developer into possibly shaming them to get on the stick...)
I recently tried using the "pattern" attribute of an input[type='text'] element. I, like so many others, found it to be a letdown that it would not validate until a form was submitted. So a person would be wasting their time typing (or pasting...) numerous characters and jumping on to other fields, only to find out after a form submit that they had entered that field wrong. Ideally, I wanted it to validate field input immediately, as the user types each key (or at the time of a paste...)
The trick to doing a partial regex match (until the ECMAscript people and browser makers get it together with PCRE...) is to not only specify a pattern regex, but associated template value(s) as a data attribute. If your field input is shorter than the pattern (or input.maxLength...), it can use them as a suffix for validation purposes. YES -this will not be practical for regexes with complex case outcomes; but for fixed-position template pattern matching -which is USUALLY what is needed- it's fine (if you happen to need something more complex, you can build on the methods shown in my code...)
The example is for a bitcoin address [ Do I have your attention now? -OK, not the people who don't believe in digital currency tech... ] The key JS function that gets this done is validatePattern. The input element in the HTML markup would be specified like this:
<input id="forward_address"
name="forward_address"
type="text"
maxlength="90"
pattern="^(bc(0([ac-hj-np-z02-9]{39}|[ac-hj-np-z02-9]{59})|1[ac-hj-np-z02-9]{8,87})|[13][a-km-zA-HJ-NP-Z1-9]{25,34})$"
data-entry-templates="['bc099999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999','bc1999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999','19999999999999999999999999999999999']"
onkeydown="return validatePattern(event)"
onpaste="return validatePattern(event)"
required
/>
[Credit goes to this post: "RegEx to match Bitcoin addresses?
" Note to old-school bitcoin zealots who will decry the use of a zero in the regex here -it's just an example for accomplishing PRELIMINARY validation; the server accepting the address passed off by the browser can do an RPC call after a form post, to validate it much more rigorously. Adjust your regex to suit.]
The exact choice of characters in the data-entry-template was a bit arbitrary; but they had to be ones such that if the input being typed or pasted by the user is still incomplete in length, it will use them as an optimistic stand-in and the input so far will still be considered valid. In the example there, for the last of the data-entry-templates ('19999999999999999999999999999999999'), that was a "1" followed by 39 nines (seeing as how the regex spec "{25,39}" dictates that a maximum of 39 digits in the second character span/group...) Because there were two forms to expect -the "bc" prefix and the older "1"/"3" prefix- I furnished a few stand-in templates for the validator to try (if it passes just one of them, it validates...) In each template case, I furnished the longest possible pattern, so as to insure the most permissive possibility in terms of length.
If you were generating this markup on a dynamic web content server, an example with template variables (a la django...) would be:
<input id="forward_address"
name="forward_address"
type="text"
maxlength="{{MAX_BTC_ADDRESS_LENGTH}}"
pattern="{{BTC_ADDRESS_REGEX}}" {# base58... #}
data-entry-templates="{{BTC_ADDRESS_TEMPLATES}}" {# base58... #}
onkeydown="return validatePattern(event)"
onpaste="return validatePattern(event)"
required
/>
[Keep in mind: I went to the deeper end of the pool here. You could just as well use this for simpler patterns of validation.]
And if you prefer to not use event attributes, but to transparently hook the function to the element's events at document load -knock yourself out.
You will note that we need to specify validatePattern on three events:
The keydown, to intercept delete and backspace keys.
The paste (the clipboard is pasted into the field's value, and if it works, it accepts it as valid; if not, the paste does not transpire...)
Of course, I also took into account when text is partially selected in the field, dictating that a key entry or pasted text will replace the selected text.
And here's a link to the [dependency-free] code that does the magic:
https://gitlab.com/osfda/validatepattern.js
(If it happens to generate interest, I'll integrate constructive and practical suggestions and give it a better readme...)
PS: The incremental-regex package posted above by Lucas Trzesniewski:
Appears not to have been updated? (I saw signs that it was undergoing modification??)
Is not browserified (tried doing that to it, to kick the tires on it -it was a module mess; welcome anyone else here to post a browserified version for testing. If it works, I'll integrate it with my input validation hooks and offer it as an alternative solution...) If you succeed in getting it browserfied, maybe sharing the exact steps that were needed would also edify everyone on this post. I tried using the esm package to fix version incompatibilities faced by browserify, but it was no go...

I strongly suspect (although I'm not 100% sure) that general case of this problem has no solution the same way as famous Turing's "Haltin problem" (see Undecidable problem). And even if there is a solution, it most probably will be not what users actually want and thus depending on your strictness will result in a bad-to-horrible UX.
Example:
Assume "target RegEx" is [a,b]*c[a,b]* also assume that you produced a reasonable at first glance "test RegEx" [a,b]*c?[a,b]* (obviously two c in the string is invalid, yeah?) and assume that the current user input is aabcbb but there is a typo because what the user actually wanted is aacbbb. There are many possible ways to fix this typo:
remove c and add it before first b - will work OK
remove first b and add after c - will work OK
add c before first b and then remove the old one - Oops, we prohibit this input as invalid and the user will go crazy because no normal human can understand such a logic.
Note also that your hitEnd will have the same problem here unless you prohibit user to enter characters in the middle of the input box that will be another way to make a horrible UI.
In the real life there would be many much more complicated examples that any of your smart heuristics will not be able to account for properly and thus will upset users.
So what to do? I think the only thing you can do and still get reasonable UX is the simplest thing you can do i.e. just analyze your "target RegEx" for set of allowed characters and make your "test RegEx" [set of allowed chars]*. And yes, if the "target RegEx" contains . wildcart, you will not be able to do any reasonable filtering at all.

Match a words, which contains specific symbols

It seems that i'm stuck with something simple, but I was unable to find quite similar question on stack.
Using JavaScript/jQuery/regexp I want to match a words that contains specific symbols in string .
I.e in given string 'check out mydomain/folder/#something' if i run this kind of search with symbols 'folder/#' it must return whole mydomain/folder/#something.
In fact I want to use this to replace whole link in a string with some kind of widget button, but as those links are pretty specific (i.e i know that they will contain folder/#) using some kind of library for this task would be overkill.

Here is the regexp you are looking for: /[\w\/]*\/folder\/#[\w\/]*/
var str = 'check out mydomain/folder/#something';
// returns ["mydomain/folder/#something"]
str.match(/[\w\/]*\/folder\/#[\w\/]*/)
Or for a more robust version or it: /[\w\/\.]*\/folder\/#(?:[\w\/]|\.\w+)*/
That last one will accept dots in the file names but ignore the last one.
For instance 'check out my.domain/foo/folder/#some.thing.'will return ["my.domain/foo/folder/#some.thing"]

regex replace on JSON is removing an Object from Array

I'm trying to improve my understanding of Regex, but this one has me quite mystified.
I started with some text defined as:
var txt = "{\"columns\":[{\"text\":\"A\",\"value\":80},{\"text\":\"B\",\"renderer\":\"gbpFormat\",\"value\":80},{\"text\":\"C\",\"value\":80}]}";
and do a replace as follows:
txt.replace(/\"renderer\"\:(.*)(?:,)/g,"\"renderer\"\:gbpFormat\,");
which results in:
"{"columns":[{"text":"A","value":80},{"text":"B","renderer":gbpFormat,"value":80}]}"
What I expected was for the renderer attribute value to have it's quotes removed; which has happened, but also the C column is completely missing! I'd really love for someone to explain how my Regex has removed column C?
As an extra bonus, if you could explain how to remove the quotes around any value for renderer (i.e. so I don't have to hard-code the value gbpFormat in the regex) that'd be fantastic.

You are using a greedy operator while you need a lazy one. Change this:
"renderer":(.*)(?:,)
^---- add here the '?' to make it lazy
To
"renderer":(.*?)(?:,)
Working demo
Your code should be:
txt.replace(/\"renderer\"\:(.*?)(?:,)/g,"\"renderer\"\:gbpFormat\,");
If you are learning regex, take a look at this documentation to know more about greedyness. A nice extract to understand this is:
Watch Out for The Greediness!
Suppose you want to use a regex to match an HTML tag. You know that
the input will be a valid HTML file, so the regular expression does
not need to exclude any invalid use of sharp brackets. If it sits
between sharp brackets, it is an HTML tag.
Most people new to regular expressions will attempt to use <.+>. They
will be surprised when they test it on a string like This is a
first test. You might expect the regex to match and when
continuing after that match, .
But it does not. The regex will match first. Obviously not
what we wanted. The reason is that the plus is greedy. That is, the
plus causes the regex engine to repeat the preceding token as often as
possible. Only if that causes the entire regex to fail, will the regex
engine backtrack. That is, it will go back to the plus, make it give
up the last iteration, and proceed with the remainder of the regex.
Like the plus, the star and the repetition using curly braces are
greedy.

Try like this:
txt = txt.replace(/"renderer":"(.*?)"/g,'"renderer":$1');
The issue in the expression you were using was this part:
(.*)(?:,)
By default, the * quantifier is greedy by default, which means that it gobbles up as much as it can, so it will run up to the last comma in your string. The easiest solution would be to turn that in to a non-greedy quantifier, by adding a question mark after the asterisk and change that part of your expression to look like this
(.*?)(?:,)
For the solution I proposed at the top of this answer, I also removed the part matching the comma, because I think it's easier just to match everything between quotes. As for your bonus question, to replace the matched value instead of having to hardcode gbpFormat, I used a backreference ($1), which will insert the first matched group into the replacement string.

Don't manipulate JSON with regexp. It's too likely that you will break it, as you have found, and more importantly there's no need to.
In addition, once you have changed
'{"columns": [..."renderer": "gbpFormat", ...]}'
into
'{"columns": [..."renderer": gbpFormat, ...]}' // remove quotes from gbpFormat
then this is no longer valid JSON. (JSON requires that property values be numbers, quoted strings, objects, or arrays.) So you will not be able to parse it, or send it anywhere and have it interpreted correctly.
Therefore you should parse it to start with, then manipulate the resulting actual JS object:
var object = JSON.parse(txt);
object.columns.forEach(function(column) {
column.renderer = ghpFormat;
});
If you want to replace any quoted value of the renderer property with the value itself, then you could try
column.renderer = window[column.renderer];
Assuming that the value is available in the global namespace.
This question falls into the category of "I need a regexp, or I wrote one and it's not working, and I'm not really sure why it has to be a regexp, but I heard they can do all kinds of things, so that's just what I imagined I must need." People use regexps to try to do far too many complex matching, splitting, scanning, replacement, and validation tasks, including on complex languages such as HTML, or in this case JSON. There is almost always a better way.
The only time I can imagine wanting to manipulate JSON with regexps is if the JSON is broken somehow, perhaps due to a bug in server code, and it needs to be fixed up in order to be parseable.

String comparison with a collation in javascript

I use jquery.autocomplete, which uses a javascript regexp to highlight substrings in the list of suggestions that match the autocomplete key string. So if the use types "Beat" and one of the autocomplete suggestions the server returns is "The Beatles" then plugin displays that suggestion as "The Beatles".
I'm trying to think of ways to make this work with string matching that isn't sensitive to accents, diacriticals and the rest. So if the user typed "Huske" and the server suggested "Hüsker Dü" then this would be displayed as "Hüsker Dü".
The principle is the same as string comparison with specified collations such as in MySql or ICU, or with Oracle's sorts. In SphinxSearch a charset_table works for this. A collation such as utf8_general_ci would be ideal for my purposes.

The only thing I can think of is pretty brute-force. If any character in the input string is known to have one or more accented forms, replace it with a character class containing all of the forms when you create the regex. For example, for the input string Huske, the regex might be /H[uùúûü]sk[eèéêë]/.