Develop Reference

RegExp capturing non-match

I have a regex for a game that should match strings in the form of go [anything] or [cardinal direction], and capture either the [anything] or the [cardinal direction]. For example, the following would match:
go north
go foo
north
And the following would not match:
foo
go
I was able to do this using two separate regexes: /^(?:go (.+))$/ to match the first case, and /^(north|east|south|west)$/ to match the second case. I tried to combine the regexes to be /^(?:go (.+))|(north|east|south|west)$/. The regex matches all of my test cases correctly, but it doesn't correctly capture for the second case. I tried plugging the regex into RegExr and noticed that even though the first case wasn't being matched against, it was still being captured.
How can I correct this?

Try using the positive lookbehind feature to find the word "go".
(north|east|south|west|(?<=go ).+)$
Note that this solution prevents you from including ^ at the start of the regex, because the text "go" is not actually included in the group.

You have to move the closing parenthesis to the end of the pattern to have both patterns between anchors, or else you would allow a match before one of the cardinal directions and it would still capture the cardinal direction at the end of the string.
Then in the JavaScript you can check for the group 1 or group 2 value.
^(?:go (.+)|(north|east|south|west))$
^
Regex demo
Using a lookbehind assertion (if supported), you might also get a match only instead of capture groups.
In that case, you can match the rest of the line, asserting go to the left at the start of the string, or match only 1 of the cardinal directions:
(?<=^go ).+|^(?:north|east|south|west)$
Regex demo

how to negate a capture group?

Using a javascript regexp, I would like to find strings like "/foo" or "/foo d/" but not "/foo /"; ie, "annotation character", then either word with no terminating annotation, or multiple words, where the termination comes at the end of the phrase (with no space). Complicating the situation, there are three possible annotation symbols: /, \ and |.
I've tried something like:
/(?:^|\s)([\\\/|])((?:[\w_-]+(?![^\1]+[\w_-]\1))|(?:[\w\s]+[\w](?=\1)))/g
That is, start with space, then annotation, then
word not followed by (anything but annotation) then letter and annotation... or
possibly multiple words, immediately followed by annotation character.
The problem is the [^\1]: this doesn't read as "anything but the annotation character" in the angle brackets.
I could repeat the whole phrase three times, one for each annotation character. Any better ideas?

As you've mentioned, [^\1] doesn't work - it matches anything that is not the character 1. In JavaScript, you can negate \1 by using a lookahead: (?:(?!\1).)* . This is not as efficient, but it works.
Your pattern can be written as:
([\\\/|])([\w\-]+(?:(?:(?!\1).)*[\w\-]\1)?)
Working example at Regex101
\w already contains underscore.
Instead of alternation (a|ab) I'm using an optional group (a(?:b)?) - we always match the first word, with optional further words and tags.
You may still want to include (?:^|\s) at the beginning.

JS regular expression, basic lookahead

I cannot figure out, for the life of me, why this regular expression
^\.(?=a)$
does not match
".a"
anyone know why?
I am going off the information provided here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Guide/Regular_Expressions

The reason it doesn't work is because the lookahead doesn't actually consume any characters, so your matching position doesn't advance.
^\.(?=a)$
Matches the beginning of line (^ -- this matches) followed by a literal . (\. -- this also matches), and then (without consuming any characters), checks to see if the next character is a literal a ((?=a)). It is, so the lookahead matches. It then asserts that your position is at the end of the string ($). This is not the case, because we're still right after the ., so the match fails.
Another possible matching expression would be
^\.(?=a$)
Which works just as above, but the assertion about the end of the line is contained in the lookahead, so this time, it matches.

Your regex is only going to match a period that's followed by an 'a', without including 'a' in the match.
Another issue is that you're using $ after a character that's basically being ignored.
Remove the $ and it will work as described.
Bonus: I've enjoyed using this lately http://www.regexpal.com/

Regexp: excluding a word but including non-standard punctuation

I want to find strings that contain words in a particular order, allowing non-standard characters in between the words but excluding a particular word or symbol.
I'm using javascript's replace function to find all instances and put into an array.
So, I want select...from, with anything except 'from' in between the words. Or I can separate select...from from select...from (, as long as I exclude nesting. I think the answer is the same for both, i.e. how do I write: find x and not y within the same regexp?
From the internet, I feel this should work: /\bselect\b^(?!from).*\bfrom\b/gi but this finds no matches.
This works to find all select...from: /\bselect\b[0-9a-zA-Z#\(\)\[\]\s\.\*,%_+-]*?\bfrom\b/gi but modifying it to exclude the parenthesis "(" at the end prevents any matches: /\bselect\b[0-9a-zA-Z#\(\)\[\]\s\.\*,%_+-]*?\bfrom\b\s*^\(/gi
Can anyone tell me how to exclude words and symbols within this regexp?
Many thanks
Emma
Edit: partial string input:
left outer join [stage].[db].[table14] o on p.Project_id = o.project_id
left outer join
(
select
different_id
,sum(costs) - ( sum(brushes) + sum(carpets) + sum(fabric) + sum(other) + sum(chairs)+ sum(apples) ) as overallNumber
from
(
select ace from [stage].db.[table18] J
Javascript:
sequel = stringInputAsAbove;
var tst = sequel.replace(/\bselect\b[\s\S]*?\bfrom\b/gi, function(a,b) { console.log('match: '+a); selects.push(b); return a; });
console.log(selects);
Console.log(selects) should print an array of numbers, where each number is the starting character of a select...from. This works for the second regexp I gave in my info, printing: [95, 251]. Your \s\S variation does the same, #stribizhev.
The first example ^(?!from).* should do likewise but returns [].
The third example \s*^\( should return 251 only but returns []. However I have just noticed that the positive expression \s*\( does give 95, so some progress! It's the negatives I'm getting wrong.

Your \bselect\b^(?!from).*\bfrom\b regex doesn't work as expected because:
^ means here beginning of a line, not negation of next part, so
the \bselect\b^ means, select word followed by beginning of a
line. After removal of ^ regex start to match something
(DEMO) but it is still invalid.
in multiline text .* without modification will not match new line,
so regex will match only select...from in single lines, but if you
change it for (.|\n)* (as a simple example) it will match
multiline, but still invalid
the * is greede quantifire, so it will match as much a possible,
but if you use reluctant quantifire *?, regex will match to first
occurance of from word, and int will start to return relativly
correct result.
\bselect\b(?!from) means match separate select word which is not
directly followed by separate from word, so it would be
selectfrom somehow composed of separate words (because
select\bfrom) so (?!from) doesn't work and it is redundant
In effect you will get regex very similar to what Stribizhev gave you: \bselect\b(.|\n)*?\bfrom\b
In third expression you meke same mistake: \bselect\b[0-9a-zA-Z#\(\)\[\]\s\.\*,%_+-]*?\bfrom\b\s*^\( using ^ as (I assume) a negation, not beginning of a line. Remove ^ and you will again get relativly valid result (match from select through from to closing parathesis ) ).
Your second regex works similar to \bselect\b(.|\n)*?\bfrom\b or \bselect\b[\s\S]*?\bfrom\b.
I wrote "relativly valid result", as I also think, that parsing SQL with regex could be very camplicated, so I am not sure if it will work in every case.
You can also try to use positive lookahead to match just position in text, like:
(?=\bselect\b(?:.|\n)*?\bfrom\b)
DEMO - the () was added to regex just to return beginning index of match in groups, so it would be easier to check it validity
Negation in regex
We use ^ as negation in character class, for example [^a-z] means match anything but not letter, so it will match number, symbol, whitespace, etc, but not letter from range a to z (Look here). But this negation is on a level of single character. I you use [^from] it will prevent regex from matching characters f,r,o and m (demo). Also the [^from]{4} will avoid matching from but also form, morf, etc.
To exlude the whole word from matching by regex, you need to use negative look ahead, like (?!from), which will fail to match, if there will be chosen word from fallowing given position. To avoid matching whole line containing from you could use ^(?!.*from.*).+$ (demo).
However in your case, you don't need to use this construction, because if you replace greedy quantifire .*\bfrom with .*?\bfrom it will match to first occurance of this word. Whats more it would couse problems. Take a look on this regex, it will not match anything because (?![\s\S]*from[\s\S]*) is not restricted by anything, so it will match only if there is no from after select, but we want to match also from! in effect this regex try to match and exclude from at once, and fail. so the (?!.*word.*) construction works much better to exclude matching line with given word.
So what to do if we don't what to match a word in a fragment of a match? I think select\b([^f]|f(?!rom))*?\bfrom\b is a good solution. With ([^f]|f(?!rom))*? it will match everything between select and from, but will not exclude from.
But if you would like to match only select...from not followed by ( then it is good idea to use (?!\() like. But in your regex (multiline, use of (.|\n)*? or [\s\S]*? it will cause to match up to next select...from part, because reluctant quantifire will chenge a plece where it need to match to make whole regex . In my opinion, good solution would be to use again:
select\b([^f]|f(?!rom))*?\bfrom\b(?!\s*?\()
which will not overlap additional select..from and will not match if there is \( after select...from - check it here

Regular expression - val.replace(/^[^a-zA-Z0-9]*|[^a-zA-Z0-9]*$/g,"'');

I was learning regular expression, It seems very much confusing to me for now.
val.replace(/^[^a-zA-Z0-9]*|[^a-zA-Z0-9]*$/g, '');
In the above expression
1) which part denotes not to include white space? as i am trying to exclude all non alphanumeric characters.
2) Since i don't want to use even '$' and ''(underscore) can i specify '$' & ''(underscore) in expression something like below?
val.replace(/^[^a-zA-Z0-9$_]*|[^a-zA-Z0-9$_]*/g, '');?
3) As 'x|y' specify that - "Find any of the alternatives specified". Then Why we have used something like this [^a-zA-Z0-9]|[^a-zA-Z0-9] which is same on both sides?
Please help me understand this, Finding it bit confused and difficult.

This regular expression replaces all starting and trailing non alphanumeric characters from the string.
It doesn't specifically specifies whitespace. It just negates every thing other than alphanumeric characters. Whatever inside square bracket is a character set - [Whatever]. A starting cap(^) INSIDE the character set says its a negation. So [^a-zA-Z0-9]* says zero or more characters which are other than a-z, A-z or 0-9.
The $ sign at the end says, to the end of string and nothing to do with $ and _ symbols. That will be already included in the character set as it all non alpha numeric characters.
Refer answer of #smathy.
Also just FYI, AFAIU regular expression can't be learned by scrolling a tutorial. You just need to go through the basics and try out the examples.

Some basic info.
When you read regular expressions, you read them from left to right. That's how the engine does it.
This is important in the case of alternations as the one on the left side(s) are always tried first.
But in the case of a $ (EOL or EOS) anchor, it might be easier to read from right to left.
Built-in assertions like line break anchors ^$ and word boundry \b along with normal assertions look ahead (?=)(?!) and look behind (?<=)(?<!), do not consume characters.
They are like single path in-line conditionals that pass or fail, where only if it passes will the expression to the right of it be examined. So they do actually Match something, they match a condition.
Format your regex so you can see what its doing. (Use a app to help you RegexFormat 5)
^ # BOS
[^a-zA-Z0-9]* # Optional not any alphanum chars
| # or,
[^a-zA-Z0-9]* # Optional not any alphanum chars
$ # EOS
Your regex in global context will always match twice, once at the beginning of the string, once at the end because of the line break anchors and because you don't actually require anything else to match.
So basically you should avoid trying to match (mix) all optional things with the built-in anchors ^$\b. That means your regex is better represented by ^[^a-zA-Z0-9]+|[^a-zA-Z0-9]+$ since you don't care if its NOT there (in the case of *, zero or more quantifier).
Good Luck, keep studying.

To answer your third question, the alternatives run all the way to the //s, so both sides are not the same. In the original regex the left alternative is "all non alphanumerics at the start of the string" and the right alternative is "all non alphanumerics at the end of the string".