I have a regex created by myself that I am currently running in PHP. Although when I merge it over to JavaScript, it refuses to work. I have also tried it in Python and it works perfectly fine.
Regex:
#[[](.[^]]+)[]][()](\d+)[)]
Testing in PHP, and working
Testing in JavaScript, and not working
JavaScript doesn't automatically escape your ].
This will help you get a visual idea:
PCRE:
JS:
Python:
So to fix this, you need to escape the brackets
#[[](.[^\]]+)[\]][()](\d+)[)]
// ^ ^
The best way to write this regex is to minimize the use of character classes:
#\[(.[^\]]+)\][()](\d+)\)
That's why it's good practice to escape this stuff instead of relying on quirks of the flavor.
I generated these images through regex101.
Related
I am using apache camel 2.11 and camel-script 2.2 for javascript support with spring DSL.
I wanted to do a regex replace with groups, but that does not seem to work in camel.
Eg :- in a transform, the following works
<javaScript>request.body.toString().replace("Y","X")</javaScript>
i.e Change YZ to XZ
But the following does not :-
<javaScript>request.body.toString().replace("/(Y)(.*)$/g","\$1")</javaScript>
ie. Change YZXXX to Y
I have tested the regex itself at https://regex101.com/, so I don't believe its a syntax issue in the regex itself
Now it may be possible that camel-script offers only partial javascript support. but I am not sure if that is the case. any ideas?
I found the issue :-)
The issue is :- I was assuming that Camel javascript can use javascript functions... when in fact it calls java functions.
Changing the code to java syntax ( calling replaceAll() function with java syntax for regex) resolved the issue.
You need to use a regex, not a string looks like a regex. Compare:
Wrong:
request.body.toString().replace("/(Y)(.*)$/g","\$1")
Correct:
request.body.toString().replace(/(Y)(.*)$/g, "\$1")
That being said, the backslash in your replace pattern is superfluous. "$1" would be correct.
I need some help with a JS Regex.
Here's the string I'm passing, I want to delete everything before 'Hanyuu-sama' with JS Replace.
Hanyuu","dj":{"id":18,"djname":"Hanyuu-sama
The first and second "Hanyuu" can change, the id number can change. This has already been cropped quite a bit with regular expressions.
Now I've tried a few and surprisingly it's failing when I do simple and complex regexes:
I've tried:
.*\"
And it does nothing, I've tried disgusting stuff in my desperation:
.*\","dj\":{\"id":.*,\"djname\":\"
And nada.
Here's a JS Fiddle and here's a http://regex101.com/r/tE2uY0/1 Regex JS matching platform.
Does anyone know why this isn't working?
I know this is likely bad practice, I'm just trying to learn Regexes.
Bonus points if anyone can refer me to a good source to learn Regular expressions. I'd love a solution but I'd like to learn how to do this myself in the future and why this one failed even more.
Your method call should look like this:
source = source.replace(/.*"/, "");
Regular expression in javascript are written between /.../ and not "/.../" like they are in many other languages.
If your string is always structured like that and it does not contain any more characters, your regex should do the trick. That's because the * quantifier acts greedy by default, thus always matching the last " in the string.
I'm trying to write a regex that would detect regex in a javascript file. I've spent some time and this is what I've come up with:
\/.*?\/[a-zA-Z]?
This works fine:
/^[^0-9][2,3]$/
/^[a-z]+( +[a-z]+){2,}$/g
However it fails for something like this:
/\/.*?\/[a-zA-Z]?/g
Just to clarify my goal, I'm going to be using this regex to detect regexes in JavaScript code and color code them.
You should also check whether the / is preceeded by a \ or not to make sure it is not being escaped:
(?<!\\)\/.*?(?<!\\)\/[a-zA-Z]?
DEMO
I found a very nice URL regex matcher on this site: http://daringfireball.net/2010/07/improved_regex_for_matching_urls . It states that it's free to use and that it's cross language compatible (including Javascript). First of all, I have to escape some of the slashes to get it to compile at all. When I do that, it works fine on Rubular.com (where I generally test regexes), with the strange side effect that each match has 5 fields: 1 is the url, and the extra 4 are empty. When I put this in JS, I get the error "Invalid Group". I am using Node.js if that makes any difference, but I wish I could understand that error. I'd like to cut back on the unnecessary empty match fields, but I don't even know where to begin diagnosing this beast. This is what I had after escaping:
(?xi)\b((?:[a-z][\w-]+:(?:\/{1,3}|[a-z0-9%])|www\d{0,3}[.]|[a-z0-9.\-]+[.][a-z]{2,4}\/)(?:[^\s()<>]+|\(([^\s()<>]+|(\([^\s()<>]+\)))*\))+(?:\(([^\s()<>]+|(\([^\s()<>]+\)))*\)|[^\s`!()\[\]{};:'".,<>?«»“”‘’] ))
Actually, you don't need the first capturing group either; it's the same as the whole match in this case, and that can always be accessed via $&. You can change all the capturing groups to non-capturing by adding ?: after the opening parens:
/\b(?:(?:[a-z][\w-]+:(?:\/{1,3}|[a-z0-9%])|www\d{0,3}[.]|[a-z0-9.\-]+[.][a-z]{2,4}\/)(?:[^\s()<>]+|\((?:[^\s()<>]+|(\(?:[^\s()<>]+\)))*\))+(?:\((?:[^\s()<>]+|(?:\(?:[^\s()<>]+\)))*\)|[^\s`!()\[\]{};:'".,<>?«»“”‘’]))/i
That "invalid group" error is due to the inline modifiers (i.e., (?xi)) which, as #kirilloid observed, are not supported in JavaScript. Jon Gruber (the regex's author) was mistaken about that, as he was about JS supporting free-spacing mode.
Just FYI, the reason you had to escape the slashes is because you were using regex-literal notation, the most common form of which uses the forward-slash as the regex delimiter. In other words, it's the language (Ruby or JavaScript) that requires you to escape that particular character, not the regex. Some languages let you choose different regex delimiters, while others don't support regex literals at all.
But these are all language issues, not regex issues; the regex itself appears to work as advertised.
Seemes, that you copied it wrong.
http://www.regular-expressions.info/javascript.html
No mode modifiers to set matching options within the regular expression.
No regular expression comments
I.e. (?xi) at the beginning is useless.
x is useless at all for compacted RegExp
i can be replaced with flag
All these result in:
/\b((?:[a-z][\w-]+:(?:\/{1,3}|[a-z0-9%])|www\d{0,3}[.]|[a-z0-9.\-]+[.][a-z]{2,4}\/)(?:[^\s()<>]+|\(([^\s()<>]+|(\([^\s()<>]+\)))*\))+(?:\(([^\s()<>]+|(\([^\s()<>]+\)))*\)|[^\s`!()\[\]{};:'".,<>?«»“”‘’]))/i
Tested and working in Google Chrome => should work in Node.js
I have seen some rails plugins which generate javascript code dynamically using ruby.
1.
%Q ( mixed block of javascript and ruby )
2.
<<-CODE
some mixed ruby and javascript code
CODE
Being a java developer I don't understand
what those strange looking syntax mean ?
Is one way better than the other ?
can anyone point me to proper documentation about such things ?
The first syntax is Ruby's string literal syntax. Specifically, the %Q (capital Q as opposed to lower-case) means that the string will be interpolated. eg:
%Q[Here's a string with #{a_variable} interpolated!]
Note that you can use any arbitrary characters as the open and close delimiters.
The second syntax is Ruby's heredoc syntax. The dash after the opening << indicates that Ruby will strip whitespace from the beginning of input lines contained in the heredoc block.
Ruby on Rails ships with the Prototype JavaScript framework built-in already. It also ships with JS generator helper methods which generate the Prototype code dynamically based on Ruby code.
You needn't use these if you don't want to. In fact, I rarely use them or Prototype at all, as jQuery is my JS framework of choice. So one way is not "better" than the other (except in the general sense that heredoc is better than the string literal syntax for certain cases).
In Ruby %Q provides a double quote delimited string, so:
%Q(mixed block of javascript and ruby) #=> "mixed block of javascript and ruby"
<<-CODE is what Ruby calls a Here Document, or simply heredoc. This is a mechanism for creating free format strings whilst preserving special characters such as new lines and tabs.
A heredoc is created by preceding the text with << followed by the delimiter string you wish to use to mark the end of the text.
text = <<-DOC
To be, or not to be: that is the question
William Shakespeare
DOC
When this string is printed it appears exactly as it was entered, together with all the new lines and tabs:
To be, or not to be: that is the question
William Shakespeare
%Q is the equivalent to a "" string in Ruby. But if you use such %Q-syntax, you don't need to escape double quotes.
It's a HEREDOC declaration. You also don't need to escape quotes there.
Strings in Ruby.
Here you can find the details.
Ruby with javascript