Use regex.test() if all you want is a boolean result: console.log(/^([a-z0-9]{5,})$/.test(‘abc1’)); // false console.log(/^([a-z0-9]{5,})$/.test(‘abc12’)); // true console.log(/^([a-z0-9]{5,})$/.test(‘abc123′)); // true …and you could remove the () from your regexp since you’ve no need for a capture.
/ ^ # start of string ( # first group start (?: (?:[^?+*{}()[\]\\|]+ # literals and ^, $ | \\. # escaped characters | \[ (?: \^?\\. | \^[^\\] | [^\\^] ) # character classes (?: [^\]\\]+ | \\. )* \] | \( (?:\?[:=!]|\?<[=!]|\?>)? (?1)?? \) # parenthesis, with recursive content | \(\? (?:R|[+-]?\d+) \) … Read more
grep -v is your friend: grep –help | grep invert -v, –invert-match select non-matching lines Also check out the related -L (the complement of -l). -L, –files-without-match only print FILE names containing no match
\d checks all Unicode digits, while [0-9] is limited to these 10 characters. For example, Persian digits, ۱۲۳۴۵۶۷۸۹, are an example of Unicode digits which are matched with \d, but not [0-9]. You can generate a list of all such characters using the following code: var sb = new StringBuilder(); for(UInt16 i = 0; i … Read more
You can access capturing groups like this: var myString = “something format_abc”; var myRegexp = /(?:^|\s)format_(.*?)(?:\s|$)/g; var myRegexp = new RegExp(“(?:^|\s)format_(.*?)(?:\s|$)”, “g”); var match = myRegexp.exec(myString); console.log(match[1]); // abc And if there are multiple matches you can iterate over them: var myString = “something format_abc”; var myRegexp = new RegExp(“(?:^|\s)format_(.*?)(?:\s|$)”, “g”); match = myRegexp.exec(myString); while … Read more
Instead of using the /regex\d/g syntax, you can construct a new RegExp object: var replace = “regex\\d”; var re = new RegExp(replace,”g”); You can dynamically create regex objects this way. Then you will do: “mystring1”.replace(re, “newstring”);
Locked. There are disputes about this answer’s content being resolved at this time. It is not currently accepting new interactions. You can’t parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can’t be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool that can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here so … Read more
Let me try to explain this with an example. Consider the following text: http://stackoverflow.com/ https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/regex Now, if I apply the regex below over it… (https?|ftp)://([^/\r\n]+)(/[^\r\n]*)? … I would get the following result: Match “http://stackoverflow.com/” Group 1: “http” Group 2: “stackoverflow.com” Group 3: “https://stackoverflow.com/” Match “https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/regex” Group 1: “https” Group 2: “stackoverflow.com” Group 3: “https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/regex” But … Read more
The fully RFC 822 compliant regex is inefficient and obscure because of its length. Fortunately, RFC 822 was superseded twice and the current specification for email addresses is RFC 5322. RFC 5322 leads to a regex that can be understood if studied for a few minutes and is efficient enough for actual use. One RFC … Read more