Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Clip] Re: Replacing comma with a tab

Expand Messages
  • Don - HtmlFixIt.com
    ... I think that is correct. The + means 1 or more, so there must be at least one. I think you are saying the same thing. Right when it gets to a comma it
    Message 1 of 34 , Apr 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      m_frascinella wrote:
      > Don,
      >
      > I think I understand it a little better, thank you.
      >
      > For the expression "^(.+?)," does it mean you start at the start of
      > the line, then find any single character, and zero or more other
      > characters, then find a comma, then stop?
      >
      > Yours,
      >
      > Michael F

      I think that is correct. The + means 1 or more, so there must be at
      least one. I think you are saying the same thing. Right when it gets
      to a comma it stops matching. The ? assures it stops at the first comma
      it comes to.
    • notetab_is_great
      ... inside one ... there ... to work correctly too. That s a strange conclusion to reach as a result of this thread... It is true that the regular expression
      Message 34 of 34 , Apr 5, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "janderri" <jan_derrick@...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, Axel Berger <Axel-Berger@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Flo wrote:
        > > > "^(.+\t.+?),"
        > >
        > > A question, as I have never yet used such a complicated term
        inside one
        > > pair of parentheses:
        > > What does the non greedy specifier apply to there exactly and would it
        > > make any sense to write (.+?\t.+?) instead? We were never told if
        there
        > > could be preexisting tabs anywhere in the source lines.
        > >
        > > Danke
        > > Axel
        > >
        >
        >
        > I think we can conclude this with :
        >
        > Regular expressions in NoteTab are a mess + we can't even trust them
        to work correctly too.


        That's a strange conclusion to reach as a result of this thread...

        It is true that the regular expression given here was written making
        an assumption that the only tab at the beginning of the data is the
        one that was just inserted by replacing the previous ",". However,
        that doesn't mean that regular expressions are a mess, or don't
        work... it just means there was a poor assumption made in constructing
        this one.

        Thing is, regular expressions are used to tackle problems that are
        hard to solve in other ways, and that doesn't mean those problems are
        easily solved using regular expressions, either... but often they are
        solvable.

        While there are many smart people contributing to this forum, many of
        the problems they are attempting to help with are poorly specified.

        Even this regular expression is correct, if the assumption made
        actually holds; it is unfortunate that assumptions like that sneak in
        without being stated... that's a problem with assumptions in general,
        though, not just ones regarding regular expressions.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.