Detect problems with ellipsis using JavaScript RegExp - javascript

I have some strings that are meant to contain three dots...but sometimes they contain only two dots in a row, or more than three dots in a row. I'm trying to detect the strings that have too many or too few dots.
This regex works, but only in Chrome:
/((?<![.])[.]{2}(?![.])|(?<![.])[.]{4,}(?![.]))/g
Other browsers' JavaScript RegExp engines don't support lookbehinds, and from what I've read, I can't rewrite this to make the lookbehind a lookahead, because the the regex already has a lookahead.
Perhaps I don't need a RegExp-based solution at all? I'm not seeing it, though.
Strings matching pattern:
I have too many dots....and that's a problem
................
...Hey, that's not going to work..
Strings not matching pattern:
Here's a big success ...and that's great!
0.30.

I think you're overthinking this. Just target all locations of 2 dots or more and forget about not matching ... since that's your replacement anyway.
See regex in use here
\.{2,}
Replacement: ...
var s = `I have too many dots....and that's a problem
................
...Hey, that's not going to work..
Here's a big success ...and that's great!
0.30.`
var r = /\.{2,}/g
console.log(s.replace(r, '...'))

Related

Rex match a string in JS

I have few set of strings as mentioned below
/v4/users/1
/v4/users/1/vehicles/1
/v4/users
/v4/users?page=1
I would like to get users in all four cases as output using regex in Javascript
I tried below in https://www.regextester.com/
(?<=/v4/).*.(?=/[^/]*/)
It doesn't seem to come up right.
Any help on this would be appreciated.
You were close with the positive lookbehind. This works:
'/v4/users/1/vehicles/1'.match(/(?<=\/v4\/)[^\/\?]*/)
This matches users because after the lookbehind you match everything until just before the next slash.
/\/v4\/(\w+)/g
This will put users in a capture group. If you want you can make it a named group as well.
You can try it here:
https://regex101.com/r/0OOr0g/1

catastrophic backstring in regular expression

I am using below regular expression
[^\/]*([A-Za-z]+_([A-Za-z]+|-?[A-Z0-9]+(\.[A_Z0-9]+)?|(?:_|:|:-|-[a-zA-Z]+|\.[a-zA-Z]+|[A-Z0-9a-z]+|=|\s|\?|\%|\.|!|#|\*)?)+(?=(,|\/)))+|,[^\/]*
and it showing me catastrophic backstring when i am trying to match with input string.
/w_100/h_500/e_saturation:50,e_tint:red:blue/c_crop,a_100,l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum./l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc/1488800313_DSC_0334__3_.JPG_mweubp.jpg
The expected output array of the matching regex will be like
[ 'w_100',
'h_500',
'e_saturation:50,e_tint:red:blue',
'c_crop,a_100,l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum.',
'l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc' ]
don't want to consider image name 1488800313_DSC_0334__3_.JPG_mweubp.jpg in match. the following
is there any method to solve this backstrack in regular expression or suggest me good regex for my input string.
The problem
You use a lot of alternations when a character class would be more effective. Also, you're getting the catastrophic backtracking due to the following quantifier:
[^\/]*([A-Za-z]+_([A-Za-z]+|-?[A-Z0-9]+(\.[A_Z0-9]+)?|(?:_|:|:-|-[a-zA-Z]+|\.[a-zA-Z]+|[A-Z0-9a-z]+|=|\s|\?|\%|\.|!|#|\*)?)+(?=(,|\/)))+|,[^\/]*
^
It's trying to match any of the alternations you have, but keeps backtracking and never makes it past all your alternations (it's sometimes comparable to an infinite loop). In your case, your regex is so ineffective that it times out. I removed half your pattern and it takes a half second to complete with almost 200K steps (and that's only half your pattern).
Original Answer
How can it be fixed?
First step is to fix the quantifier and prevent it from continuously backtracking. This is actually quite easy, just make it possessive: + becomes ++. Changing the quantifier to possessive yields a pattern that takes about 56ms to complete and approx 9K steps (on my computer)
Second step is to improve the efficiency of the pattern. Change your alternations to character classes where possible.
(?:_|:|:-|-[a-zA-Z]+|\.[a-zA-Z]+|[A-Z0-9a-z]+|=|\s|\?|\%|\.|!|#|\*)?
# should instead be
(?::-|[_:-=\s?%.!#*]|[-.][a-zA-Z]+|[A-Z0-9a-z]+)?
It's much shorter, much more concise and less prone to errors.
The new pattern
See regex in use here
This pattern only takes 271 steps and less than one millisecond to complete (yes, using PCRE engine, works in Java too)
(?<=[,\/])[A-Za-z]+_(?:[A-Z0-9a-z]+|-?[A-Z0-9]+(?:\.[A-Z0-9]+)?|:-|[_:-=\s?%.!#*]|[-.][a-zA-Z]+)++
I also changed your positive lookahead to a positive lookbehind (?<=[,\/]) to improve performance.
Additionally, if you don't need all the specific logic, you can quite simply use the following regex (just under half as many steps as my regex above):
See regex in use here
(?<=[,\/])[A-Za-z]+_[^,\/]+
Results
This results in the following array:
P.S. I'm assuming there'a a typo in your expected output and that the / between l_text and l_fetch should also be split on; needs clarification.
w_100
h_500
e_saturation:50
e_tint:red:blue
c_crop
a_100
l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum.
l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc
Edit #1
The OP clarified the expected results. I added , to the character class in the fourth option of the non-capture group:
See regex in use here
(?<=[,\/])[A-Za-z]+_(?:[A-Z0-9a-z]+|-?[A-Z0-9]+(?:\.[A-Z0-9]+)?|:-|[_:-=\s?%.!#*,]|[-.][a-zA-Z]+)++
And in its shortened form:
See regex in use here
(?<=\/)[A-Za-z]+_[^\/]+
Results
This results in the following array:
w_100
h_500
e_saturation:50,e_tint:red:blue
c_crop,a_100,l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum.
l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc
Edit #2
The OP presented another input and identified issues with Edit #1 related to that input. I added logic to force a fail on the last item in a string.
New test string:
/w_100/h_500/e_saturation:50,e_tint:red:blue/c_crop,a_100,l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum./l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc/sample_url_image.jpg
See regex in use here
(?<=\/)(?![A-Za-z]+_[^\/]+$)[A-Za-z]+_[^\/]+
Same results as in Edit #1.
PCRE version (if anyone is looking for it) - more efficient than the method above:
See regex in use hereenter link description here
(?<=\/)[A-Za-z]+_[^\/]+(?:$(*SKIP)(*FAIL))?
Assuming your example has a typo, e.g. the last / would be split too:
You can simply split on /, then filter out the .jpg items:
function splitWithFilter(line, filter) {
var filterRe = filter ? new RegExp(filter, 'i') : null;
return line
.replace(/^\//, '') // remove leading /
.split(/\//)
//.filter(Boolean) // filter out empty items (alternative to above replace())
.filter(function(item) {
return !filterRe || !item.match(filterRe);
});
}
var str = "/w_100/h_500/e_saturation:50,e_tint:red:blue/c_crop,a_100,l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum./l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc/1488800313_DSC_0334__3_.JPG_mweubp.jpg";
console.log(JSON.stringify(splitWithFilter(str, '\\.jpg$'), null, ' '));
Expected output:
[
"w_100",
"h_500",
"e_saturation:50,e_tint:red:blue",
"c_crop,a_100,l_text:Neucha_26_bold:Loremipsum.",
"l_fetch:aHR0cDovL2Nsb3VkaW5hcnkuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9vbGRfbG9nby5wbmc"
]

Javascript regex to pick all multi line text between two strings [duplicate]

var ss= "<pre>aaaa\nbbb\nccc</pre>ddd";
var arr= ss.match( /<pre.*?<\/pre>/gm );
alert(arr); // null
I'd want the PRE block be picked up, even though it spans over newline characters. I thought the 'm' flag does it. Does not.
Found the answer here before posting. SInce I thought I knew JavaScript (read three books, worked hours) and there wasn't an existing solution at SO, I'll dare to post anyways. throw stones here
So the solution is:
var ss= "<pre>aaaa\nbbb\nccc</pre>ddd";
var arr= ss.match( /<pre[\s\S]*?<\/pre>/gm );
alert(arr); // <pre>...</pre> :)
Does anyone have a less cryptic way?
Edit: this is a duplicate but since it's harder to find than mine, I don't remove.
It proposes [^] as a "multiline dot". What I still don't understand is why [.\n] does not work. Guess this is one of the sad parts of JavaScript..
DON'T use (.|[\r\n]) instead of . for multiline matching.
DO use [\s\S] instead of . for multiline matching
Also, avoid greediness where not needed by using *? or +? quantifier instead of * or +. This can have a huge performance impact.
See the benchmark I have made: https://jsben.ch/R4Hxu
Using [^]: fastest
Using [\s\S]: 0.83% slower
Using (.|\r|\n): 96% slower
Using (.|[\r\n]): 96% slower
NB: You can also use [^] but it is deprecated in the below comment.
[.\n] does not work because . has no special meaning inside of [], it just means a literal .. (.|\n) would be a way to specify "any character, including a newline". If you want to match all newlines, you would need to add \r as well to include Windows and classic Mac OS style line endings: (.|[\r\n]).
That turns out to be somewhat cumbersome, as well as slow, (see KrisWebDev's answer for details), so a better approach would be to match all whitespace characters and all non-whitespace characters, with [\s\S], which will match everything, and is faster and simpler.
In general, you shouldn't try to use a regexp to match the actual HTML tags. See, for instance, these questions for more information on why.
Instead, try actually searching the DOM for the tag you need (using jQuery makes this easier, but you can always do document.getElementsByTagName("pre") with the standard DOM), and then search the text content of those results with a regexp if you need to match against the contents.
You do not specify your environment and version of JavaScript (ECMAScript), and I realise this post was from 2009, but just for completeness:
With the release of ECMA2018 we can now use the s flag to cause . to match \n (see https://stackoverflow.com/a/36006948/141801).
Thus:
let s = 'I am a string\nover several\nlines.';
console.log('String: "' + s + '".');
let r = /string.*several.*lines/s; // Note 's' modifier
console.log('Match? ' + r.test(s)); // 'test' returns true
This is a recent addition and will not work in many current environments, for example Node v8.7.0 does not seem to recognise it, but it works in Chromium, and I'm using it in a Typescript test I'm writing and presumably it will become more mainstream as time goes by.
Now there's the s (single line) modifier, that lets the dot matches new lines as well :)
\s will also match new lines :D
Just add the s behind the slash
/<pre>.*?<\/pre>/gms
[.\n] doesn't work, because dot in [] (by regex definition; not javascript only) means the dot-character. You can use (.|\n) (or (.|[\n\r])) instead.
I have tested it (Chrome) and it's working for me (both [^] and [^\0]), by changing the dot (.) with either [^\0] or [^] , because dot doesn't match line break (See here: http://www.regular-expressions.info/dot.html).
var ss= "<pre>aaaa\nbbb\nccc</pre>ddd";
var arr= ss.match( /<pre[^\0]*?<\/pre>/gm );
alert(arr); //Working
In addition to above-said examples, it is an alternate.
^[\\w\\s]*$
Where \w is for words and \s is for white spaces
[\\w\\s]*
This one was beyond helpful for me, especially for matching multiple things that include new lines, every single other answer ended up just grouping all of the matches together.

How to remove non alphanumeric characters and space, but keep foreign language in JavaScript

I want to remove signs like:
!##$%^&*()_+`-=[]\|{};':",./<>?。,‘“”’;【】『』
and many more.
But ensuring all the foreign characters are kept, such as Chinese, French, Greece, etc.
In Ruby, I'm able to do it with regex
/[^\p{Alnum}]/
It doesn't work in JS. Thanks in advance.
Answer
Thank Jordan Gray. The 8400-letter regex is awesome. It is a short solution as it is only 8.4kb compare to 63kb of XRegExp.
For the record, the full answer I use is
/[^1-9\u0041-\u005A\u0061-\u007A\u00AA\u00B5\u00BA\u00C0-\u00D6\u00D8-\u00F6\u00F8-\u02C1\u02C6-\u02D1\u02E0-\u02E4\u02EC\u02EE\u0370-\u0374\u0376\u0377\u037A-\u037D\u0386\u0388-\u038A\u038C\u038E-\u03A1\u03A3-\u03F5\u03F7-\u0481\u048A-\u0527\u0531-\u0556\u0559\u0561-\u0587\u05D0-\u05EA\u05F0-\u05F2\u0620-\u064A\u066E\u066F\u0671-\u06D3\u06D5\u06E5\u06E6\u06EE\u06EF\u06FA-\u06FC\u06FF\u0710\u0712-\u072F\u074D-\u07A5\u07B1\u07CA-\u07EA\u07F4\u07F5\u07FA\u0800-\u0815\u081A\u0824\u0828\u0840-\u0858\u08A0\u08A2-\u08AC\u0904-\u0939\u093D\u0950\u0958-\u0961\u0971-\u0977\u0979-\u097F\u0985-\u098C\u098F\u0990\u0993-\u09A8\u09AA-\u09B0\u09B2\u09B6-\u09B9\u09BD\u09CE\u09DC\u09DD\u09DF-\u09E1\u09F0\u09F1\u0A05-\u0A0A\u0A0F\u0A10\u0A13-\u0A28\u0A2A-\u0A30\u0A32\u0A33\u0A35\u0A36\u0A38\u0A39\u0A59-\u0A5C\u0A5E\u0A72-\u0A74\u0A85-\u0A8D\u0A8F-\u0A91\u0A93-\u0AA8\u0AAA-\u0AB0\u0AB2\u0AB3\u0AB5-\u0AB9\u0ABD\u0AD0\u0AE0\u0AE1\u0B05-\u0B0C\u0B0F\u0B10\u0B13-\u0B28\u0B2A-\u0B30\u0B32\u0B33\u0B35-\u0B39\u0B3D\u0B5C\u0B5D\u0B5F-\u0B61\u0B71\u0B83\u0B85-\u0B8A\u0B8E-\u0B90\u0B92-\u0B95\u0B99\u0B9A\u0B9C\u0B9E\u0B9F\u0BA3\u0BA4\u0BA8-\u0BAA\u0BAE-\u0BB9\u0BD0\u0C05-\u0C0C\u0C0E-\u0C10\u0C12-\u0C28\u0C2A-\u0C33\u0C35-\u0C39\u0C3D\u0C58\u0C59\u0C60\u0C61\u0C85-\u0C8C\u0C8E-\u0C90\u0C92-\u0CA8\u0CAA-\u0CB3\u0CB5-\u0CB9\u0CBD\u0CDE\u0CE0\u0CE1\u0CF1\u0CF2\u0D05-\u0D0C\u0D0E-\u0D10\u0D12-\u0D3A\u0D3D\u0D4E\u0D60\u0D61\u0D7A-\u0D7F\u0D85-\u0D96\u0D9A-\u0DB1\u0DB3-\u0DBB\u0DBD\u0DC0-\u0DC6\u0E01-\u0E30\u0E32\u0E33\u0E40-\u0E46\u0E81\u0E82\u0E84\u0E87\u0E88\u0E8A\u0E8D\u0E94-\u0E97\u0E99-\u0E9F\u0EA1-\u0EA3\u0EA5\u0EA7\u0EAA\u0EAB\u0EAD-\u0EB0\u0EB2\u0EB3\u0EBD\u0EC0-\u0EC4\u0EC6\u0EDC-\u0EDF\u0F00\u0F40-\u0F47\u0F49-\u0F6C\u0F88-\u0F8C\u1000-\u102A\u103F\u1050-\u1055\u105A-\u105D\u1061\u1065\u1066\u106E-\u1070\u1075-\u1081\u108E\u10A0-\u10C5\u10C7\u10CD\u10D0-\u10FA\u10FC-\u1248\u124A-\u124D\u1250-\u1256\u1258\u125A-\u125D\u1260-\u1288\u128A-\u128D\u1290-\u12B0\u12B2-\u12B5\u12B8-\u12BE\u12C0\u12C2-\u12C5\u12C8-\u12D6\u12D8-\u1310\u1312-\u1315\u1318-\u135A\u1380-\u138F\u13A0-\u13F4\u1401-\u166C\u166F-\u167F\u1681-\u169A\u16A0-\u16EA\u1700-\u170C\u170E-\u1711\u1720-\u1731\u1740-\u1751\u1760-\u176C\u176E-\u1770\u1780-\u17B3\u17D7\u17DC\u1820-\u1877\u1880-\u18A8\u18AA\u18B0-\u18F5\u1900-\u191C\u1950-\u196D\u1970-\u1974\u1980-\u19AB\u19C1-\u19C7\u1A00-\u1A16\u1A20-\u1A54\u1AA7\u1B05-\u1B33\u1B45-\u1B4B\u1B83-\u1BA0\u1BAE\u1BAF\u1BBA-\u1BE5\u1C00-\u1C23\u1C4D-\u1C4F\u1C5A-\u1C7D\u1CE9-\u1CEC\u1CEE-\u1CF1\u1CF5\u1CF6\u1D00-\u1DBF\u1E00-\u1F15\u1F18-\u1F1D\u1F20-\u1F45\u1F48-\u1F4D\u1F50-\u1F57\u1F59\u1F5B\u1F5D\u1F5F-\u1F7D\u1F80-\u1FB4\u1FB6-\u1FBC\u1FBE\u1FC2-\u1FC4\u1FC6-\u1FCC\u1FD0-\u1FD3\u1FD6-\u1FDB\u1FE0-\u1FEC\u1FF2-\u1FF4\u1FF6-\u1FFC\u2071\u207F\u2090-\u209C\u2102\u2107\u210A-\u2113\u2115\u2119-\u211D\u2124\u2126\u2128\u212A-\u212D\u212F-\u2139\u213C-\u213F\u2145-\u2149\u214E\u2183\u2184\u2C00-\u2C2E\u2C30-\u2C5E\u2C60-\u2CE4\u2CEB-\u2CEE\u2CF2\u2CF3\u2D00-\u2D25\u2D27\u2D2D\u2D30-\u2D67\u2D6F\u2D80-\u2D96\u2DA0-\u2DA6\u2DA8-\u2DAE\u2DB0-\u2DB6\u2DB8-\u2DBE\u2DC0-\u2DC6\u2DC8-\u2DCE\u2DD0-\u2DD6\u2DD8-\u2DDE\u2E2F\u3005\u3006\u3031-\u3035\u303B\u303C\u3041-\u3096\u309D-\u309F\u30A1-\u30FA\u30FC-\u30FF\u3105-\u312D\u3131-\u318E\u31A0-\u31BA\u31F0-\u31FF\u3400-\u4DB5\u4E00-\u9FCC\uA000-\uA48C\uA4D0-\uA4FD\uA500-\uA60C\uA610-\uA61F\uA62A\uA62B\uA640-\uA66E\uA67F-\uA697\uA6A0-\uA6E5\uA717-\uA71F\uA722-\uA788\uA78B-\uA78E\uA790-\uA793\uA7A0-\uA7AA\uA7F8-\uA801\uA803-\uA805\uA807-\uA80A\uA80C-\uA822\uA840-\uA873\uA882-\uA8B3\uA8F2-\uA8F7\uA8FB\uA90A-\uA925\uA930-\uA946\uA960-\uA97C\uA984-\uA9B2\uA9CF\uAA00-\uAA28\uAA40-\uAA42\uAA44-\uAA4B\uAA60-\uAA76\uAA7A\uAA80-\uAAAF\uAAB1\uAAB5\uAAB6\uAAB9-\uAABD\uAAC0\uAAC2\uAADB-\uAADD\uAAE0-\uAAEA\uAAF2-\uAAF4\uAB01-\uAB06\uAB09-\uAB0E\uAB11-\uAB16\uAB20-\uAB26\uAB28-\uAB2E\uABC0-\uABE2\uAC00-\uD7A3\uD7B0-\uD7C6\uD7CB-\uD7FB\uF900-\uFA6D\uFA70-\uFAD9\uFB00-\uFB06\uFB13-\uFB17\uFB1D\uFB1F-\uFB28\uFB2A-\uFB36\uFB38-\uFB3C\uFB3E\uFB40\uFB41\uFB43\uFB44\uFB46-\uFBB1\uFBD3-\uFD3D\uFD50-\uFD8F\uFD92-\uFDC7\uFDF0-\uFDFB\uFE70-\uFE74\uFE76-\uFEFC\uFF21-\uFF3A\uFF41-\uFF5A\uFF66-\uFFBE\uFFC2-\uFFC7\uFFCA-\uFFCF\uFFD2-\uFFD7\uFFDA-\uFFDC]+/g
This is funny, isn't it?
Someone has already suggested XRegExp. That's a great package, but if all you want is a way of matching letters you can grab it straight from the source.
In this case, what you're looking for is a way to match the whole Unicode Letter category, which is defined in the source for the XRegExp Unicode Base package. With XRegExp, you could match these with \p{L} or \p{Letter}. A JS-compatible expression for matching characters not in this category would work out to (brace yourself):
var NonLetters = /[^\u0041-\u005A\u0061-\u007A\u00AA\u00B5\u00BA\u00C0-\u00D6\u00D8-\u00F6\u00F8-\u02C1\u02C6-\u02D1\u02E0-\u02E4\u02EC\u02EE\u0370-\u0374\u0376\u0377\u037A-\u037D\u0386\u0388-\u038A\u038C\u038E-\u03A1\u03A3-\u03F5\u03F7-\u0481\u048A-\u0527\u0531-\u0556\u0559\u0561-\u0587\u05D0-\u05EA\u05F0-\u05F2\u0620-\u064A\u066E\u066F\u0671-\u06D3\u06D5\u06E5\u06E6\u06EE\u06EF\u06FA-\u06FC\u06FF\u0710\u0712-\u072F\u074D-\u07A5\u07B1\u07CA-\u07EA\u07F4\u07F5\u07FA\u0800-\u0815\u081A\u0824\u0828\u0840-\u0858\u08A0\u08A2-\u08AC\u0904-\u0939\u093D\u0950\u0958-\u0961\u0971-\u0977\u0979-\u097F\u0985-\u098C\u098F\u0990\u0993-\u09A8\u09AA-\u09B0\u09B2\u09B6-\u09B9\u09BD\u09CE\u09DC\u09DD\u09DF-\u09E1\u09F0\u09F1\u0A05-\u0A0A\u0A0F\u0A10\u0A13-\u0A28\u0A2A-\u0A30\u0A32\u0A33\u0A35\u0A36\u0A38\u0A39\u0A59-\u0A5C\u0A5E\u0A72-\u0A74\u0A85-\u0A8D\u0A8F-\u0A91\u0A93-\u0AA8\u0AAA-\u0AB0\u0AB2\u0AB3\u0AB5-\u0AB9\u0ABD\u0AD0\u0AE0\u0AE1\u0B05-\u0B0C\u0B0F\u0B10\u0B13-\u0B28\u0B2A-\u0B30\u0B32\u0B33\u0B35-\u0B39\u0B3D\u0B5C\u0B5D\u0B5F-\u0B61\u0B71\u0B83\u0B85-\u0B8A\u0B8E-\u0B90\u0B92-\u0B95\u0B99\u0B9A\u0B9C\u0B9E\u0B9F\u0BA3\u0BA4\u0BA8-\u0BAA\u0BAE-\u0BB9\u0BD0\u0C05-\u0C0C\u0C0E-\u0C10\u0C12-\u0C28\u0C2A-\u0C33\u0C35-\u0C39\u0C3D\u0C58\u0C59\u0C60\u0C61\u0C85-\u0C8C\u0C8E-\u0C90\u0C92-\u0CA8\u0CAA-\u0CB3\u0CB5-\u0CB9\u0CBD\u0CDE\u0CE0\u0CE1\u0CF1\u0CF2\u0D05-\u0D0C\u0D0E-\u0D10\u0D12-\u0D3A\u0D3D\u0D4E\u0D60\u0D61\u0D7A-\u0D7F\u0D85-\u0D96\u0D9A-\u0DB1\u0DB3-\u0DBB\u0DBD\u0DC0-\u0DC6\u0E01-\u0E30\u0E32\u0E33\u0E40-\u0E46\u0E81\u0E82\u0E84\u0E87\u0E88\u0E8A\u0E8D\u0E94-\u0E97\u0E99-\u0E9F\u0EA1-\u0EA3\u0EA5\u0EA7\u0EAA\u0EAB\u0EAD-\u0EB0\u0EB2\u0EB3\u0EBD\u0EC0-\u0EC4\u0EC6\u0EDC-\u0EDF\u0F00\u0F40-\u0F47\u0F49-\u0F6C\u0F88-\u0F8C\u1000-\u102A\u103F\u1050-\u1055\u105A-\u105D\u1061\u1065\u1066\u106E-\u1070\u1075-\u1081\u108E\u10A0-\u10C5\u10C7\u10CD\u10D0-\u10FA\u10FC-\u1248\u124A-\u124D\u1250-\u1256\u1258\u125A-\u125D\u1260-\u1288\u128A-\u128D\u1290-\u12B0\u12B2-\u12B5\u12B8-\u12BE\u12C0\u12C2-\u12C5\u12C8-\u12D6\u12D8-\u1310\u1312-\u1315\u1318-\u135A\u1380-\u138F\u13A0-\u13F4\u1401-\u166C\u166F-\u167F\u1681-\u169A\u16A0-\u16EA\u1700-\u170C\u170E-\u1711\u1720-\u1731\u1740-\u1751\u1760-\u176C\u176E-\u1770\u1780-\u17B3\u17D7\u17DC\u1820-\u1877\u1880-\u18A8\u18AA\u18B0-\u18F5\u1900-\u191C\u1950-\u196D\u1970-\u1974\u1980-\u19AB\u19C1-\u19C7\u1A00-\u1A16\u1A20-\u1A54\u1AA7\u1B05-\u1B33\u1B45-\u1B4B\u1B83-\u1BA0\u1BAE\u1BAF\u1BBA-\u1BE5\u1C00-\u1C23\u1C4D-\u1C4F\u1C5A-\u1C7D\u1CE9-\u1CEC\u1CEE-\u1CF1\u1CF5\u1CF6\u1D00-\u1DBF\u1E00-\u1F15\u1F18-\u1F1D\u1F20-\u1F45\u1F48-\u1F4D\u1F50-\u1F57\u1F59\u1F5B\u1F5D\u1F5F-\u1F7D\u1F80-\u1FB4\u1FB6-\u1FBC\u1FBE\u1FC2-\u1FC4\u1FC6-\u1FCC\u1FD0-\u1FD3\u1FD6-\u1FDB\u1FE0-\u1FEC\u1FF2-\u1FF4\u1FF6-\u1FFC\u2071\u207F\u2090-\u209C\u2102\u2107\u210A-\u2113\u2115\u2119-\u211D\u2124\u2126\u2128\u212A-\u212D\u212F-\u2139\u213C-\u213F\u2145-\u2149\u214E\u2183\u2184\u2C00-\u2C2E\u2C30-\u2C5E\u2C60-\u2CE4\u2CEB-\u2CEE\u2CF2\u2CF3\u2D00-\u2D25\u2D27\u2D2D\u2D30-\u2D67\u2D6F\u2D80-\u2D96\u2DA0-\u2DA6\u2DA8-\u2DAE\u2DB0-\u2DB6\u2DB8-\u2DBE\u2DC0-\u2DC6\u2DC8-\u2DCE\u2DD0-\u2DD6\u2DD8-\u2DDE\u2E2F\u3005\u3006\u3031-\u3035\u303B\u303C\u3041-\u3096\u309D-\u309F\u30A1-\u30FA\u30FC-\u30FF\u3105-\u312D\u3131-\u318E\u31A0-\u31BA\u31F0-\u31FF\u3400-\u4DB5\u4E00-\u9FCC\uA000-\uA48C\uA4D0-\uA4FD\uA500-\uA60C\uA610-\uA61F\uA62A\uA62B\uA640-\uA66E\uA67F-\uA697\uA6A0-\uA6E5\uA717-\uA71F\uA722-\uA788\uA78B-\uA78E\uA790-\uA793\uA7A0-\uA7AA\uA7F8-\uA801\uA803-\uA805\uA807-\uA80A\uA80C-\uA822\uA840-\uA873\uA882-\uA8B3\uA8F2-\uA8F7\uA8FB\uA90A-\uA925\uA930-\uA946\uA960-\uA97C\uA984-\uA9B2\uA9CF\uAA00-\uAA28\uAA40-\uAA42\uAA44-\uAA4B\uAA60-\uAA76\uAA7A\uAA80-\uAAAF\uAAB1\uAAB5\uAAB6\uAAB9-\uAABD\uAAC0\uAAC2\uAADB-\uAADD\uAAE0-\uAAEA\uAAF2-\uAAF4\uAB01-\uAB06\uAB09-\uAB0E\uAB11-\uAB16\uAB20-\uAB26\uAB28-\uAB2E\uABC0-\uABE2\uAC00-\uD7A3\uD7B0-\uD7C6\uD7CB-\uD7FB\uF900-\uFA6D\uFA70-\uFAD9\uFB00-\uFB06\uFB13-\uFB17\uFB1D\uFB1F-\uFB28\uFB2A-\uFB36\uFB38-\uFB3C\uFB3E\uFB40\uFB41\uFB43\uFB44\uFB46-\uFBB1\uFBD3-\uFD3D\uFD50-\uFD8F\uFD92-\uFDC7\uFDF0-\uFDFB\uFE70-\uFE74\uFE76-\uFEFC\uFF21-\uFF3A\uFF41-\uFF5A\uFF66-\uFFBE\uFFC2-\uFFC7\uFFCA-\uFFCF\uFFD2-\uFFD7\uFFDA-\uFFDC]/
jsFiddle demo.
Pretty hefty, but what you'd expect if you aim to match uppercase, lowercase, title case, modifier and other letters in every language in the basic multilingual plane¹, including all ligatures and accented characters. Don't forget to add 0-9 to the beginning if you want to match numbers as well!
If you trust your Unicode not to get mangled, you could use this shorter version:
var NonLetters = /[^A-Za-zªµºÀ-ÖØ-öø-ˁˆ-ˑˠ-ˤˬˮͰ-ʹͶͷͺ-ͽΆΈ-ΊΌΎ-ΡΣ-ϵϷ-ҁҊ-ԧԱ-Ֆՙա-ևא-תװ-ײؠ-يٮٯٱ-ۓەۥۦۮۯۺ-ۼۿܐܒ-ܯݍ-ޥޱߊ-ߪߴߵߺࠀ-ࠕࠚࠤࠨࡀ-ࡘࢠࢢ-ࢬऄ-हऽॐक़-ॡॱ-ॷॹ-ॿঅ-ঌএঐও-নপ-রলশ-হঽৎড়ঢ়য়-ৡৰৱਅ-ਊਏਐਓ-ਨਪ-ਰਲਲ਼ਵਸ਼ਸਹਖ਼-ੜਫ਼ੲ-ੴઅ-ઍએ-ઑઓ-નપ-રલળવ-હઽૐૠૡଅ-ଌଏଐଓ-ନପ-ରଲଳଵ-ହଽଡ଼ଢ଼ୟ-ୡୱஃஅ-ஊஎ-ஐஒ-கஙசஜஞடணதந-பம-ஹௐఅ-ఌఎ-ఐఒ-నప-ళవ-హఽౘౙౠౡಅ-ಌಎ-ಐಒ-ನಪ-ಳವ-ಹಽೞೠೡೱೲഅ-ഌഎ-ഐഒ-ഺഽൎൠൡൺ-ൿඅ-ඖක-නඳ-රලව-ෆก-ะาำเ-ๆກຂຄງຈຊຍດ-ທນ-ຟມ-ຣລວສຫອ-ະາຳຽເ-ໄໆໜ-ໟༀཀ-ཇཉ-ཬྈ-ྌက-ဪဿၐ-ၕၚ-ၝၡၥၦၮ-ၰၵ-ႁႎႠ-ჅჇჍა-ჺჼ-ቈቊ-ቍቐ-ቖቘቚ-ቝበ-ኈኊ-ኍነ-ኰኲ-ኵኸ-ኾዀዂ-ዅወ-ዖዘ-ጐጒ-ጕጘ-ፚᎀ-ᎏᎠ-Ᏼᐁ-ᙬᙯ-ᙿᚁ-ᚚᚠ-ᛪᜀ-ᜌᜎ-ᜑᜠ-ᜱᝀ-ᝑᝠ-ᝬᝮ-ᝰក-ឳៗៜᠠ-ᡷᢀ-ᢨᢪᢰ-ᣵᤀ-ᤜᥐ-ᥭᥰ-ᥴᦀ-ᦫᧁ-ᧇᨀ-ᨖᨠ-ᩔᪧᬅ-ᬳᭅ-ᭋᮃ-ᮠᮮᮯᮺ-ᯥᰀ-ᰣᱍ-ᱏᱚ-ᱽᳩ-ᳬᳮ-ᳱᳵᳶᴀ-ᶿḀ-ἕἘ-Ἕἠ-ὅὈ-Ὅὐ-ὗὙὛὝὟ-ώᾀ-ᾴᾶ-ᾼιῂ-ῄῆ-ῌῐ-ΐῖ-Ίῠ-Ῥῲ-ῴῶ-ῼⁱⁿₐ-ₜℂℇℊ-ℓℕℙ-ℝℤΩℨK-ℭℯ-ℹℼ-ℿⅅ-ⅉⅎↃↄⰀ-Ⱞⰰ-ⱞⱠ-ⳤⳫ-ⳮⳲⳳⴀ-ⴥⴧⴭⴰ-ⵧⵯⶀ-ⶖⶠ-ⶦⶨ-ⶮⶰ-ⶶⶸ-ⶾⷀ-ⷆⷈ-ⷎⷐ-ⷖⷘ-ⷞⸯ々〆〱-〵〻〼ぁ-ゖゝ-ゟァ-ヺー-ヿㄅ-ㄭㄱ-ㆎㆠ-ㆺㇰ-ㇿ㐀-䶵一-鿌ꀀ-ꒌꓐ-ꓽꔀ-ꘌꘐ-ꘟꘪꘫꙀ-ꙮꙿ-ꚗꚠ-ꛥꜗ-ꜟꜢ-ꞈꞋ-ꞎꞐ-ꞓꞠ-Ɦꟸ-ꠁꠃ-ꠅꠇ-ꠊꠌ-ꠢꡀ-ꡳꢂ-ꢳꣲ-ꣷꣻꤊ-ꤥꤰ-ꥆꥠ-ꥼꦄ-ꦲꧏꨀ-ꨨꩀ-ꩂꩄ-ꩋꩠ-ꩶꩺꪀ-ꪯꪱꪵꪶꪹ-ꪽꫀꫂꫛ-ꫝꫠ-ꫪꫲ-ꫴꬁ-ꬆꬉ-ꬎꬑ-ꬖꬠ-ꬦꬨ-ꬮꯀ-ꯢ가-힣ힰ-ퟆퟋ-ퟻ豈-舘並-龎ff-stﬓ-ﬗיִײַ-ﬨשׁ-זּטּ-לּמּנּסּףּפּצּ-ﮱﯓ-ﴽﵐ-ﶏﶒ-ﷇﷰ-ﷻﹰ-ﹴﹶ-ﻼA-Za-zヲ-하-ᅦᅧ-ᅬᅭ-ᅲᅳ-ᅵ]/
This gives a little idea of the sheer diversity of this category. Personally, I would use the first expression since it is far less likely to be invisibly mucked up in a way that you will probably never find out about.
¹ This doesn't include characters from the so-called astral planes such as emoji, ancient/historic scripts like Egyptian hieroglyphs and the many many CJK ideographs. It's your call if you think these should count as "letters" in some very extended sense and thus want to include them.
As #Barney suggested, I would go with XRegExp (v2.0.0 is about 63kb minimized). Here is an example, which I believe does what you are asking for? Using require.js to load the library.
HTML
<input id="entry" type="text"></input>
<div id="display"></div>
Javascript
require.config({
paths: {
'XRegExp': 'https://raw.github.com/slevithan/xregexp/v2.0.0/min/xregexp-all-min'
}
})
require(['XRegExp'], function() {
var display = document.getElementById('display'),
alnum = XRegExp('[^\\p{L}\\p{Nd}]', 'g');
document.getElementById('entry').addEventListener('keyup', function(evt) {
display.textContent = XRegExp.replace(evt.target.value, alnum, '');
}, false);
});
On jsFiddle

How to use JavaScript regex over multiple lines?

var ss= "<pre>aaaa\nbbb\nccc</pre>ddd";
var arr= ss.match( /<pre.*?<\/pre>/gm );
alert(arr); // null
I'd want the PRE block be picked up, even though it spans over newline characters. I thought the 'm' flag does it. Does not.
Found the answer here before posting. SInce I thought I knew JavaScript (read three books, worked hours) and there wasn't an existing solution at SO, I'll dare to post anyways. throw stones here
So the solution is:
var ss= "<pre>aaaa\nbbb\nccc</pre>ddd";
var arr= ss.match( /<pre[\s\S]*?<\/pre>/gm );
alert(arr); // <pre>...</pre> :)
Does anyone have a less cryptic way?
Edit: this is a duplicate but since it's harder to find than mine, I don't remove.
It proposes [^] as a "multiline dot". What I still don't understand is why [.\n] does not work. Guess this is one of the sad parts of JavaScript..
DON'T use (.|[\r\n]) instead of . for multiline matching.
DO use [\s\S] instead of . for multiline matching
Also, avoid greediness where not needed by using *? or +? quantifier instead of * or +. This can have a huge performance impact.
See the benchmark I have made: https://jsben.ch/R4Hxu
Using [^]: fastest
Using [\s\S]: 0.83% slower
Using (.|\r|\n): 96% slower
Using (.|[\r\n]): 96% slower
NB: You can also use [^] but it is deprecated in the below comment.
[.\n] does not work because . has no special meaning inside of [], it just means a literal .. (.|\n) would be a way to specify "any character, including a newline". If you want to match all newlines, you would need to add \r as well to include Windows and classic Mac OS style line endings: (.|[\r\n]).
That turns out to be somewhat cumbersome, as well as slow, (see KrisWebDev's answer for details), so a better approach would be to match all whitespace characters and all non-whitespace characters, with [\s\S], which will match everything, and is faster and simpler.
In general, you shouldn't try to use a regexp to match the actual HTML tags. See, for instance, these questions for more information on why.
Instead, try actually searching the DOM for the tag you need (using jQuery makes this easier, but you can always do document.getElementsByTagName("pre") with the standard DOM), and then search the text content of those results with a regexp if you need to match against the contents.
You do not specify your environment and version of JavaScript (ECMAScript), and I realise this post was from 2009, but just for completeness:
With the release of ECMA2018 we can now use the s flag to cause . to match \n (see https://stackoverflow.com/a/36006948/141801).
Thus:
let s = 'I am a string\nover several\nlines.';
console.log('String: "' + s + '".');
let r = /string.*several.*lines/s; // Note 's' modifier
console.log('Match? ' + r.test(s)); // 'test' returns true
This is a recent addition and will not work in many current environments, for example Node v8.7.0 does not seem to recognise it, but it works in Chromium, and I'm using it in a Typescript test I'm writing and presumably it will become more mainstream as time goes by.
Now there's the s (single line) modifier, that lets the dot matches new lines as well :)
\s will also match new lines :D
Just add the s behind the slash
/<pre>.*?<\/pre>/gms
[.\n] doesn't work, because dot in [] (by regex definition; not javascript only) means the dot-character. You can use (.|\n) (or (.|[\n\r])) instead.
I have tested it (Chrome) and it's working for me (both [^] and [^\0]), by changing the dot (.) with either [^\0] or [^] , because dot doesn't match line break (See here: http://www.regular-expressions.info/dot.html).
var ss= "<pre>aaaa\nbbb\nccc</pre>ddd";
var arr= ss.match( /<pre[^\0]*?<\/pre>/gm );
alert(arr); //Working
In addition to above-said examples, it is an alternate.
^[\\w\\s]*$
Where \w is for words and \s is for white spaces
[\\w\\s]*
This one was beyond helpful for me, especially for matching multiple things that include new lines, every single other answer ended up just grouping all of the matches together.

Categories

Resources