|
|
Posted by davranfor on 10/18/07 08:42
On 18 oct, 05:40, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
> <davran...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1192656086.671916.314180@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On 17 oct, 21:10, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:50:59 +0200, <davran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Hello
>
> >> >> > I need a regular expression that validate a list of numbers
> >> >> > separated
> >> >> > by "-" , numbers can not be greater than 999
>
> >> >> > Valid examples
> >> >> > 0
> >> >> > 12-455-01
> >> >> > 1-9
> >> >> > 125-32-155-45-45
>
> >> >> > Invalid examples
> >> >> > -1
> >> >> > 45-
> >> >> > 1-45665456-4
> >> >> > 12-45-
> >> >> > -
>
> >> >> Hmmz, showing a 'best try' would be appreciated. However, I normally
> >> >> can't
> >> >> resist a good regex, so here it goes:
>
> >> >> '/^([1-9][0-9]?)?[0-9](-([1-9][0-9]?)?[0-9])*$/'
>
> >> >> Untested BTW. I've made 78-034-89 invalid, as a number should not
> >> >> start
> >> >> with zero, unless it's only 1 zero. 't Would be simpler if it was
> >> >> valid,
> >> >> your choice.
>
> >> > works like a charm, can you explain the simple way without check zero
> >> > at start?
>
> >> '/^ # match start of string
> >> [0-9]{1,3} # match 1 to 3 digits
> >> ( # start subpattern
> >> - # literal -
> >> [0-9]{1,3} # match 1 to 3 digits
> >> )* # match subpattern zero or more times
> >> $ # match has to run all the way up untill the end
> >> of the string
> >> /x'
>
> >> When starting with regexes, and certainly for the more complex ones,
> >> don't
> >> underestimate the power of /x: comments in the regex itself, indentation
> >> to keep things clear, it does wonders. It also keeps you from
> >> rediscovering how the hell your regex worked 6 months after you wrote it
> >> when you have to track a bug.....
> >> --
> >> Rik Wasmus
>
> > Thanks !!! simple and beatifull
>
> first, very good rik.
>
> second, dave...if you're going to cross post the same question, at least
> have the courtesy to go back and say, 'i found an answer, thanks for your
> time.' shortly after your posting to alt.php, you had two responses...one of
> which (not mine, btw), is much more simply expressed than rik's. either way,
> be courteous to both of the groups you posted to...that way, we'll keep
> responding to your questions rather than thinking that someone somewhere
> else is responding.
ok steve, excuse my poor english: I've post in 2 groups because the
question doesn't appear in the first group (comp.lang.javascript), I
don't like cross post, but you're right
A last question Rik :))), I was looking in http://regexlib.com a way
to do that and without an answer:
Same but numbers can't be lesser than the previous number, must be
equal or greater, is this possible with regex??
0-45-90-120 -> Valid
0-45-45-90 -> Valid
0-90-45-120 -> Invalid
thanks
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|