It explains all parts of your regex and highlights all matches in your example text. I usually add a comment to a regex101 playground if I use a regex in code.
I have written dozens upon dozens of Regexes without using reverse negative lookups, but I guess according to you I don’t really know Regexes because I haven’t used those specific features?
You don’t need to know all about a subject to know a subject.
There’s a lot of use cases where regex makes a lot of sense: complex log parsing, determining if a value entered is a valid phone number or email, syntax highlighting, data validation in ML preprocessing, etc. A lot of languages also come with certain features that allow regex to be more efficient than dumb string matching, such as the ability to pre-compile patterns and the flexibility of being able to choose between deterministic and non-deterministic finite automata, should you need efficiency for one use case and flexibility for another. It really depends on what you’re designing and how it’s going to be used, of course.
My guess is, that someone started with a small share of features to find a simple solution for the problem, but the complexity of the problem got waaaay out of hand.
Regexes are actually used in formal computer science (if that’s the right term), i.e. “proof that this and that algorithm won’t deadlock” or something like that.
They’re actually really elegant and can cover a lot. But you’ll have to learn them by using them.
For the purpose of algorithm verification, the final and/or pushdown automaton or probably sometimes even Turing Machines are used, because they are easier to work with. “Real” regular expressions are only nice to write a grammar for regular languages which can be easily interpreted by the computer I think. The thing is, that regexs in the *nix and programming language world are also used for searching which is why there are additional special characters to indicate things like: “it has to end with …” and there are shortcuts for when you want that a character or sequence occurs
at least once,
once or never or
a specified number of times
back to back.
In “standard” regex, you would only have
() for grouping,
* for 0 or any number of occurances (so a* means blank or a or aa or …)
+ as combining two characters/groups with exclusive or (in programming, a+ is mostly the same as aa* so this is a difference)
and sometimes some way to have a shortcut for (a+b+c+…+z) if you want to allow any lower case character as the next one
So there are only 4 characters which have the same expressive power as the extended syntax with the exception of not being able to indicate, that it should occur at the end or beginning of a string/line (which could even be removed if one would have implemented different functions or options for the tools we now have instead)
You are probably thinking of Temporal logic which allows us to model if algorithms and programs terminate etc! It can be represented by using state machines tho!
It’s been a while, so I’m quite rusty, especiallyeon the terminology, but I think we modelled feasible sequences of finite and infinite state machines using regexes.
Regex is actually just a way to write (Epsilon) non determistic state automata(ε-NDA) using text! ε-NDA comes from automata theory and they are just a somewhat powerful way to describe state machines!
They can kind of be seen as a stepping stone to things like Context-Free Grammars which is what language parsers use to define their language/parsers, and Turing machines! Regex is a fundamental part of computer science, and they are of course incredibly useful in string validation due to their expressive power!
If you study at uni and get the chance to take a course in automata theory I recommend it! Personal favorite subject :)
It’s pattern-matching. Like searching *.txt to get all text files. It’s just… more. There’s symbols for matching the start of a string, the end of a string, a set of characters, repetition, etc. Very “etc.” And the syntax blows. The choices of . for match-any-character and * for zero-or-more really fuck with common expectations.
It can also replace substrings that match. Like changing the file extension of all text files. Where it gets properly difficult is in “capture groups.” Like looking for all file extensions, and sticking a tilde after the dot. You can put parentheses around part of the pattern being matched and then reference that in the replacement. Conceptually simple - pain in the ass to use properly - syntax both sucks and blows.
Lookahead is what you do to match “ass” but not “assault.” I refuse to elaborate further.
I still don’t understand regex at all
I recommend using https://regex101.com/
It explains all parts of your regex and highlights all matches in your example text. I usually add a comment to a regex101 playground if I use a regex in code.
deleted by creator
I taught myself Regex using Regex101, so something doesn’t add up here.
deleted by creator
Does every Regex contain a reverse negative lookup? Do I need to know how to do a reverse negative lookup to write a Regex?
If not, why are you asking?
deleted by creator
I have written dozens upon dozens of Regexes without using reverse negative lookups, but I guess according to you I don’t really know Regexes because I haven’t used those specific features?
You don’t need to know all about a subject to know a subject.
deleted by creator
Lol. I doubt the inventors of regex know all of regex
Regexes are write-only. No one can understand other peoples regexes
Not only other people’s regexes. Mine from last week and before too
Haha
That’s also 'cause other people’s regex are garbage!
That’s why they don’t belong anywhere outside single line bash commands.
deleted by creator
Use of regex in production code is a sign of incompetence.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
There’s a lot of use cases where regex makes a lot of sense: complex log parsing, determining if a value entered is a valid phone number or email, syntax highlighting, data validation in ML preprocessing, etc. A lot of languages also come with certain features that allow regex to be more efficient than dumb string matching, such as the ability to pre-compile patterns and the flexibility of being able to choose between deterministic and non-deterministic finite automata, should you need efficiency for one use case and flexibility for another. It really depends on what you’re designing and how it’s going to be used, of course.
deleted by creator
Perfect pair of words for every solution that involves a regex.
The plural of regex is regrets.
My guess is, that someone started with a small share of features to find a simple solution for the problem, but the complexity of the problem got waaaay out of hand.
Regexes are actually used in formal computer science (if that’s the right term), i.e. “proof that this and that algorithm won’t deadlock” or something like that.
They’re actually really elegant and can cover a lot. But you’ll have to learn them by using them.
For the purpose of algorithm verification, the final and/or pushdown automaton or probably sometimes even Turing Machines are used, because they are easier to work with. “Real” regular expressions are only nice to write a grammar for regular languages which can be easily interpreted by the computer I think. The thing is, that regexs in the *nix and programming language world are also used for searching which is why there are additional special characters to indicate things like: “it has to end with …” and there are shortcuts for when you want that a character or sequence occurs
In “standard” regex, you would only have
So there are only 4 characters which have the same expressive power as the extended syntax with the exception of not being able to indicate, that it should occur at the end or beginning of a string/line (which could even be removed if one would have implemented different functions or options for the tools we now have instead)
So one could say that *nix regex is bloated /s
You are probably thinking of Temporal logic which allows us to model if algorithms and programs terminate etc! It can be represented by using state machines tho!
It’s been a while, so I’m quite rusty, especiallyeon the terminology, but I think we modelled feasible sequences of finite and infinite state machines using regexes.
That’s how I was forced to learn 'em in uni. ;)
Ohhh I must be confusing the two! But yea, Regex is just NDAs in text form! The course I have had on it is one of my favorites! Really fun stuff
Regex is actually just a way to write (Epsilon) non determistic state automata(ε-NDA) using text! ε-NDA comes from automata theory and they are just a somewhat powerful way to describe state machines! They can kind of be seen as a stepping stone to things like Context-Free Grammars which is what language parsers use to define their language/parsers, and Turing machines! Regex is a fundamental part of computer science, and they are of course incredibly useful in string validation due to their expressive power! If you study at uni and get the chance to take a course in automata theory I recommend it! Personal favorite subject :)
It’s really not too bad as long as:
you use a proper IDE (e.g. Regex101) with highlighting and piecewise explanations
you use named capturing groups
you give the regex a descriptive name in your code
People write regex in notepad and complain it doesn’t work on the first try…
It’s pattern-matching. Like searching
*.txtto get all text files. It’s just… more. There’s symbols for matching the start of a string, the end of a string, a set of characters, repetition, etc. Very “etc.” And the syntax blows. The choices of.for match-any-character and*for zero-or-more really fuck with common expectations.It can also replace substrings that match. Like changing the file extension of all text files. Where it gets properly difficult is in “capture groups.” Like looking for all file extensions, and sticking a tilde after the dot. You can put parentheses around part of the pattern being matched and then reference that in the replacement. Conceptually simple - pain in the ass to use properly - syntax both sucks and blows.
Lookahead is what you do to match “ass” but not “assault.” I refuse to elaborate further.
What part do you not understand?
.*
So you do not understand nothing? That’s great to hear.
No, No, they don’t understand everything and nothing!
Both statements match 😄
Yes
//////?-.,", duh,?!
deleted by creator
Nobody does.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator