[Implemented] RegExp

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 2:14 pm

see here... viewtopic.php?p=70899#70899

regular expressions to use on strings would be nice...

Post by **Dare2** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 2:40 pm

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:34 pm

could somebody please explain to me what RegExp is?

I've heard some talk about it lately and to be honest I'm feelin' a bit out of the loop

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 4:46 pm

know a little dos?

it's like using wildcards, patterns and the like, only more flexible aka. more complex

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 4:56 pm

Ohhh... got it

I coded one of those for Rapid-Q a while back... I wonder if I still have it!

Kale · Post by **Kale** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 5:01 pm

PolyVector wrote:could somebody please explain to me what RegExp is? I've heard some talk about it lately and to be honest I'm feelin' a bit out of the loop

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/helpsheets/regex.html

Regular Expresions are extremely useful for checking and/or replacing strings. Very quick too.

ivory · Post by **ivory** » Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:08 pm

Kale wrote:
PolyVector wrote:could somebody please explain to me what RegExp is? I've heard some talk about it lately and to be honest I'm feelin' a bit out of the loop
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/helpsheets/regex.html
Regular Expresions are extremely useful for checking and/or replacing strings. Very quick too.

I don't know if I would call them very quick. They are adequate for working with small strings and parameter lists, but I have found them quite unsatisfactory working with large strings.

Another similar product I have used is "AWK", but still, nothing beats a well written piece of code.

Kale · Post by **Kale** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 8:11 am

I guess i meant very quick to input complicated search patterns. i.e. checking an email address is easy

techjunkie · Post by **techjunkie** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 11:00 am

Yeahh!!!

regexp would be so cool!!!

/<(\w+)[^>]*>[^<]*<\/\1>/ig

prefuct · Post by **prefuct** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 5:06 pm

*loses his lunch*

naw · Post by **naw** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:19 am

Regular Expressions are a must for a X-Platform Language (that includes Unix/Linux). Its true that ReExprs are fairly painful to learn - but believe me if you come from the Unix/Linux Scripting world and take RegExpr for granted with SED / AWK / GREP etc. Its a hard painful world without them. Seriously, 10 chars of RegExpr = 100 lines of code in any regular language.

Ok - perhaps a slight exaggeration, but those who use it know what I mean.

Such a shame that PB lacks RE & STDIN

Please Fred STDIN would take you a couple of hours to code

and you could bolt in a *standard* RE Library, I'm sure....

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:21 pm

stdin / stdout yes please...

hattonpa · Post by **hattonpa** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:09 am

Yes, regular expressions please! Also, STDIN/STDOUT please!

The PBRegExpEx lib by FloHimself is a great help. But I had to work for a while to get my head around the syntax and build my own procedures to make its implementation a little easier for me. It reminds me somewhat of PCRE, which I used once in a C++ app. I'm sure part of the reason for the time it took was because I'm new to PureBasic. No global or case-insensitive functionality. But, I'm certainly glad FloHimself has provided it. I'm a regular expression junkie

bluejoke · Post by **bluejoke** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:41 pm

I would appreciate a RegExp-implication, too!

hattonpa · Post by **hattonpa** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:41 am

Just wanted to correct my previous statement that with PBRegExpEx there is 'no... case-insensitive functionality'. There is, in fact, control over case sensitivity when searching with the meta characters \u (upper case) and \l (lower case). Guess I hadn't read the Help file carefully enough. <grimace> So, while I prefer Perl's syntax of "/[a-z]+/i" I can get the results I need using PBRegExpEx with "(/u|/l)+". Of course, in this case, I'd have the possible overhead of an unneeded backreference or subexpression.

Anyway, just thought I'd clarify, in case anyone cares...

Paul H.