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

Re: [NTS] Re: regular expression to find anything up to two spaces in a row ...

Expand Messages
  • Axel Berger
    ... Nope. What you suggest equals two instances of not space . What Don wants is anything but two spaces in row . Quite different. All your finds will have
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 20, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Eb wrote:
      > Move the quatifier outside of the class, Inside the class you're
      > just adding the "{2}" characters to the class.
      > ([^ ]{2})

      Nope. What you suggest equals "two instances of 'not space'". What Don
      wants is "anything but two spaces in row". Quite different.

      All your finds will have a length of exactly two and they can't include
      even a single space.

      There really is no single-step solution for this, but then, as long as
      clips is doing all the work and I don't have to, I really don't mind how
      many steps it takes.

      Axel
    • Don
      I am actually exporting this one to another purpose, but testing in both notetab and regex buddy.
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 20, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        I am actually exporting this one to another purpose, but testing in both
        notetab and regex buddy.

        On 6/20/2011 2:33 PM, Axel Berger wrote:
        > Eb wrote:
        >> Move the quatifier outside of the class, Inside the class you're
        >> just adding the "{2}" characters to the class.
        >> ([^ ]{2})
        >
        > Nope. What you suggest equals "two instances of 'not space'". What Don
        > wants is "anything but two spaces in row". Quite different.
        >
        > All your finds will have a length of exactly two and they can't include
        > even a single space.
        >
        > There really is no single-step solution for this, but then, as long as
        > clips is doing all the work and I don't have to, I really don't mind how
        > many steps it takes.
        >
        > Axel
      • Eb
        Right you are. I started out commenting on the placement of quatifiers. Then I was on a roll, but forgot about the _not_ two spaces. ... Actually, I would
        Message 3 of 13 , Jun 21, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Right you are.

          I started out commenting on the placement of quatifiers.

          Then I was on a roll, but forgot about the _not_ two spaces.

          --- In ntb-scripts@yahoogroups.com, Axel Berger <Axel-Berger@...> wrote:
          > Nope. What you suggest equals "two instances of 'not space'". What Don
          > wants is "anything but two spaces in row". Quite different.
          >
          > All your finds will have a length of exactly two and they can't include
          > even a single space.
          >
          > There really is no single-step solution for this, but then, as long


          Actually, I would expect the assertion:

          (?= )

          to find a string ending in 2 spaces, without including the two spaces in the match.

          Eb
        • Axel Berger
          ... Yes, you re right and that s probably better than my ^!Find (?s)(.+?)( {2,}) RSTI1 but it has the same problem. Don specified ... which I took to mean
          Message 4 of 13 , Jun 21, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Eb wrote:
            > Actually, I would expect the assertion:
            > (?= )
            > to find a string ending in 2 spaces, without including the
            > two spaces in the match.

            Yes, you're right and that's probably better than my

            ^!Find "(?s)(.+?)( {2,})" RSTI1

            but it has the same problem. Don specified
            > everything and anything unless until I
            > encounter two spaces in a row ...
            which I took to mean the two spaces may or may not occur, as is usual
            when using negative classes. If they're certain to do, then things get
            much easier.

            Axel
          • Don
            Yes the two spaces are certain to occur :-) I am limited I supposed in my understanding so I didn t make the assumption you made. Now that you explain it like
            Message 5 of 13 , Jun 21, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Yes the two spaces are certain to occur :-)

              I am limited I supposed in my understanding so I didn't make the
              assumption you made. Now that you explain it like that I guess it makes
              sense. What I am trying to do is use two spaces as a delimiter in
              essence. I will actually be discarding the spaces as unnecessary in
              what I am doing.

              Off to look up (?= ) and see what it means.

              On 6/21/2011 7:54 PM, Axel Berger wrote:
              > Eb wrote:
              >> Actually, I would expect the assertion:
              >> (?= )
              >> to find a string ending in 2 spaces, without including the
              >> two spaces in the match.
              >
              > Yes, you're right and that's probably better than my
              >
              > ^!Find "(?s)(.+?)( {2,})" RSTI1
              >
              > but it has the same problem. Don specified
              >> everything and anything unless until I
              >> encounter two spaces in a row ...
              > which I took to mean the two spaces may or may not occur, as is usual
              > when using negative classes. If they're certain to do, then things get
              > much easier.
              >
              > Axel
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Fookes Software: http://www.fookes.com/
              > NoteTab website: http://www.notetab.com/
              > NoteTab Discussion Lists: http://www.notetab.com/groups.php
              >
              > ***
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Don
              From Regex Buddy (my newest friend ...): Positive lookahead works just the same. q(?=u) matches a q that is followed by a u, without making the u part of the
              Message 6 of 13 , Jun 21, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                From Regex Buddy (my newest friend ...):

                "Positive lookahead works just the same. q(?=u) matches a q that is
                followed by a u, without making the u part of the match. The positive
                lookahead construct is a pair of round brackets, with the opening
                bracket followed by a question mark and an equals sign. You can use any
                regular expression inside the lookahead. Any valid regular expression
                can be used inside the lookahead."

                If I understand correctly, I can then actually do this:
                (?=( ))
                and create a back-reference if I wish?

                Learning as I go here :-) and it's fun. Thanks Axel and Eb!


                On 6/21/2011 7:54 PM, Axel Berger wrote:
                > Eb wrote:
                >> Actually, I would expect the assertion:
                >> (?= )
                >> to find a string ending in 2 spaces, without including the
                >> two spaces in the match.
                >
                > Yes, you're right and that's probably better than my
                >
                > ^!Find "(?s)(.+?)( {2,})" RSTI1
                >
                > but it has the same problem. Don specified
                >> everything and anything unless until I
                >> encounter two spaces in a row ...
                > which I took to mean the two spaces may or may not occur, as is usual
                > when using negative classes. If they're certain to do, then things get
                > much easier.
                >
                > Axel
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Fookes Software: http://www.fookes.com/
                > NoteTab website: http://www.notetab.com/
                > NoteTab Discussion Lists: http://www.notetab.com/groups.php
                >
                > ***
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • John Shotsky
                [Off to look up (?= ) and see what it means.] I use it often. It is the inverse of K - which doesn t capture anything before, but it evaluates it. (?=), when
                Message 7 of 13 , Jun 21, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  [Off to look up (?= ) and see what it means.]

                  I use it often. It is the inverse of \K - which doesn't capture anything before, but it evaluates it. (?=), when used in
                  a regex, is exactly the same, meaning anything that follows is not captured, but is evaluated.



                  So, this:

                  "this that"

                  Run on:

                  ^!Replace "this\x20\K(?=that)" >> "with\x20" ARSW

                  Produces "this with that"

                  Pretty handy for inserting something without any capturing.

                  Regards,

                  John



                  From: ntb-scripts@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ntb-scripts@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Don
                  Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 18:23
                  To: ntb-scripts@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [NTS] Re: regular expression to find anything up to two spaces in a row ...





                  Yes the two spaces are certain to occur :-)

                  I am limited I supposed in my understanding so I didn't make the
                  assumption you made. Now that you explain it like that I guess it makes
                  sense. What I am trying to do is use two spaces as a delimiter in
                  essence. I will actually be discarding the spaces as unnecessary in
                  what I am doing.

                  Off to look up (?= ) and see what it means.

                  On 6/21/2011 7:54 PM, Axel Berger wrote:
                  > Eb wrote:
                  >> Actually, I would expect the assertion:
                  >> (?= )
                  >> to find a string ending in 2 spaces, without including the
                  >> two spaces in the match.
                  >
                  > Yes, you're right and that's probably better than my
                  >
                  > ^!Find "(?s)(.+?)( {2,})" RSTI1
                  >
                  > but it has the same problem. Don specified
                  >> everything and anything unless until I
                  >> encounter two spaces in a row ...
                  > which I took to mean the two spaces may or may not occur, as is usual
                  > when using negative classes. If they're certain to do, then things get
                  > much easier.
                  >
                  > Axel
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > Fookes Software: http://www.fookes.com/
                  > NoteTab website: http://www.notetab.com/
                  > NoteTab Discussion Lists: http://www.notetab.com/groups.php
                  >
                  > ***
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Art Kocsis
                  John, Not quite. Look ahead and look behind assertions are very useful, I agree but K and (?
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jun 22, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    John,

                    Not quite. Look ahead and look behind assertions are very useful, I agree but
                    \K and (?<=...) [the positive look behind assertion] are NOT EXACTLY the
                    same. The big difference (and what makes \K so much better), is that the
                    escape sequence \K allows variable length sub patterns whereas the positive/
                    negative look ahead/look behind assertions all require fixed length sub
                    patterns.

                    Namaste', Art

                    At 06/21/2011 19:12, John wrote:
                    >[Off to look up (?= ) and see what it means.]
                    >
                    >I use it often. It is the inverse of \K - which doesn't capture anything
                    >before, but it evaluates it.
                    >(?=), when used in a regex, is exactly the same, meaning anything that
                    >follows is not captured,
                    > but is evaluated.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.