I'm wondering why my regex is not working. The only group it works on is year.
The rest of the groups are None.
formatted_date = re.search('.*((?P<day>\d{1,2}) )?((?P<month>[a-zA-Z]+) )?(?P<year>\d{4}).*', '10 may 1991')
The idea behind the regex is that it will work on the following input:
10 may 1991
may 1991
1991
The regex is written in Python.
Thanks in advance :)
The issue is that greedy dot matching subpattern at the beginning of the pattern grabs all the characters up to the end, and then backtracks yielding what it has to yield to accommodate for the other subpatterns. Since the first 2 are optional, no text is given to them.
You do not need any .* as re.search does not require a full string match.
Use
(?:(?P<day>\d{1,2}) )?(?:(?P<month>[a-zA-Z]+) )?(?P<year>\d{4})
See the regex demo
I also converted capturing optional groups to non-capturing so that the match object was a bit cleaner.
Note that if you still use your approach, you might consider using .*? at the beginning of the pattern (lazy dot matching), but you would have to worry about newlines then (ok, you can use re.S flag to solve that one), and that way, you'd get the first instance of the date in your string. If you have more than one, and you need to get the last one, the best approach is to use re.findall with my suggested pattern and just get the last element of the resulting list.
Related
This is an example string:
123456#p654321
Currently, I am using this match to capture 123456 and 654321 in to two different groups:
([0-9].*)#p([0-9].*)
But on occasions, the #p654321 part of the string will not be there, so I will only want to capture the first group. I tried to make the second group "optional" by appending ? to it, which works, but only as long as there is a #p at the end of the remaining string.
What would be the best way to solve this problem?
You have the #p outside of the capturing group, which makes it a required piece of the result. You are also using the dot character (.) improperly. Dot (in most reg-ex variants) will match any character. Change it to:
([0-9]*)(?:#p([0-9]*))?
The (?:) syntax is how you get a non-capturing group. We then capture just the digits that you're interested in. Finally, we make the whole thing optional.
Also, most reg-ex variants have a \d character class for digits. So you could simplify even further:
(\d*)(?:#p(\d*))?
As another person has pointed out, the * operator could potentially match zero digits. To prevent this, use the + operator instead:
(\d+)(?:#p(\d+))?
Your regex will actually match no digits, because you've used * instead of +.
This is what (I think) you want:
(\d+)(?:#p(\d+))?
What I am trying to do is match values from one file to another, but I only need to match the first portion of the string and the last portion.
I am reading each file into a list, and manipulating these based on different Regex patterns I have created. Everything works, except when it comes to these type of values:
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-1:24
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-6:24
In this example, I only want to match 'V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20' and then compare the '24' value at the end of the string. The number x in '20-x:', can vary and doesn't matter in terms of comparisons, as long as the first and last parts of this string match.
This is the Regex I am using:
re.compile(r"(?:.*V-1\\ZDS\\R\\EMBO-20-\d.*)(:\d*\w.*)")
Once I filter down the list, I use the following function to return the difference between the two sets:
funcDiff = lambda x, y: list((set(x)- set(y))) + list((set(y)- set(x)))
Is there a way to take the list of differences and filter out the ones that have matching values after the
:
as mentioned above?
I apologize is this is an obvious answer, I'm new to Python and Regex!
The output I get is the differences between the entire strings, so even if the first and last part of the string match, if the number following the 'EMBO-20-x' doesn't also match, it returns it as being different.
Before discussing your question, regex101 is an incredibly useful tool for this type of thing.
Your issue stems from two issues:
1.) The way you used .*
2.) Greedy vs. Nongreedy matches
.* kinda sucks
.* is a regex expression that is very rarely what you actually want.
As a quick aside, a useful regex expression is [^c]* or [^c]+. These expressions match any character except the letter c, with the first expression matching 0 or more, and the second matched 1 or more.
.* will match all characters as many times as it can. Instead, try to start your regex patterns with more concrete starting points. Two good ways to do this are lookbehind expressions and anchors.
Another quick aside, it's likely that you are misusing regex.match and regex.find. match will only return a match that begins at the start of the string, while find will return matches anywhere in the input string. This could be the reason you included the .* in the first place, to allow a .match call to return a match deeper in the string.
Lookbehind Expressions
There are more complete explanations online, but in short, regex patterns like:
(?<=test)foo
will match the text foo, but only if test is right in front of it. To be more clear, the following strings will not match that regex:
foo
test-foo
test foo
but the following string will match:
testfoo
This will only match the text foo, though.
Anchors
Another option is anchors. ^ and $ are special characters, matching the start and end of a line of text. If you know your regex pattern will match exactly one line of text, start it with ^ and end it with $.
Leading patterns with .* and ending with .* are likely the source of your issue. Although you did not include full examples of your input or your code, you likely used match as opposed to find.
In regex, . matches any character, and * means 0 or more times. This means that for any input, your pattern will match the entire string.
Greedy vs. Non-Greedy qualifiers
The second issue is related to greediness. When your regex patterns have a * in them, they can match 0 or more characters. This can hide problems, as entire * expressions can be skipped. Your regex is likely matched several lines of text as one match, and hiding multiple records in a single .*.
The Actual Answer
Taking all of this in to consideration, let's assume that your input data looks like this:
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-1:24
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-6:24
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-3:93
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-6:22309
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-8:2238
V-1\ZDS\R\EMBO-20-3:28
A better regular expression would be:
^V-1\\ZDS\\R\\EMBO-20-\d:(\d+)$
To visualize this regex in action, follow this link.
There are several differences I would like to highlight:
Starting the expression with ^ and ending with $. This forces the regex to match exactly one line. Even though the pattern works without these characters, it's good practice when working with regex to be as explicit as possible.
No useless non-capturing group. Your example had a (?:) group at the start. This denotes a group that does not capture it's match. It's useful if you want to match a subpattern multiple times ((?:ab){5} matches ababababab without capturing anything). However, in your example, it did nothing :)
Only capturing the number. This makes it easier to extract the value of the capture groups.
No use of *, one use of +. + works like *, but it matches 1 or more. This is often more correct, as it prevents 'skipping' entire characters.
My regex pattern looks something like
<xxxx location="file path/level1/level2" xxxx some="xxx">
I am only interested in the part in quotes assigned to location. Shouldn't it be as easy as below without the greedy switch?
/.*location="(.*)".*/
Does not seem to work.
You need to make your regular expression lazy/non-greedy, because by default, "(.*)" will match all of "file path/level1/level2" xxx some="xxx".
Instead you can make your dot-star non-greedy, which will make it match as few characters as possible:
/location="(.*?)"/
Adding a ? on a quantifier (?, * or +) makes it non-greedy.
Note: this is only available in regex engines which implement the Perl 5 extensions (Java, Ruby, Python, etc) but not in "traditional" regex engines (including Awk, sed, grep without -P, etc.).
location="(.*)" will match from the " after location= until the " after some="xxx unless you make it non-greedy.
So you either need .*? (i.e. make it non-greedy by adding ?) or better replace .* with [^"]*.
[^"] Matches any character except for a " <quotation-mark>
More generic: [^abc] - Matches any character except for an a, b or c
How about
.*location="([^"]*)".*
This avoids the unlimited search with .* and will match exactly to the first quote.
Use non-greedy matching, if your engine supports it. Add the ? inside the capture.
/location="(.*?)"/
Use of Lazy quantifiers ? with no global flag is the answer.
Eg,
If you had global flag /g then, it would have matched all the lowest length matches as below.
Here's another way.
Here's the one you want. This is lazy [\s\S]*?
The first item:
[\s\S]*?(?:location="[^"]*")[\s\S]* Replace with: $1
Explaination: https://regex101.com/r/ZcqcUm/2
For completeness, this gets the last one. This is greedy [\s\S]*
The last item:[\s\S]*(?:location="([^"]*)")[\s\S]*
Replace with: $1
Explaination: https://regex101.com/r/LXSPDp/3
There's only 1 difference between these two regular expressions and that is the ?
The other answers here fail to spell out a full solution for regex versions which don't support non-greedy matching. The greedy quantifiers (.*?, .+? etc) are a Perl 5 extension which isn't supported in traditional regular expressions.
If your stopping condition is a single character, the solution is easy; instead of
a(.*?)b
you can match
a[^ab]*b
i.e specify a character class which excludes the starting and ending delimiiters.
In the more general case, you can painstakingly construct an expression like
start(|[^e]|e(|[^n]|n(|[^d])))end
to capture a match between start and the first occurrence of end. Notice how the subexpression with nested parentheses spells out a number of alternatives which between them allow e only if it isn't followed by nd and so forth, and also take care to cover the empty string as one alternative which doesn't match whatever is disallowed at that particular point.
Of course, the correct approach in most cases is to use a proper parser for the format you are trying to parse, but sometimes, maybe one isn't available, or maybe the specialized tool you are using is insisting on a regular expression and nothing else.
Because you are using quantified subpattern and as descried in Perl Doc,
By default, a quantified subpattern is "greedy", that is, it will
match as many times as possible (given a particular starting location)
while still allowing the rest of the pattern to match. If you want it
to match the minimum number of times possible, follow the quantifier
with a "?" . Note that the meanings don't change, just the
"greediness":
*? //Match 0 or more times, not greedily (minimum matches)
+? //Match 1 or more times, not greedily
Thus, to allow your quantified pattern to make minimum match, follow it by ? :
/location="(.*?)"/
import regex
text = 'ask her to call Mary back when she comes back'
p = r'(?i)(?s)call(.*?)back'
for match in regex.finditer(p, str(text)):
print (match.group(1))
Output:
Mary
Here is a list of input strings:
"collect_project_stage1_20220927_foot60cm_arm70cm_height170cm_......",
"collect_project_version_1_0927_foot60cm_height170cm_......",
"collect_project_ver1_20220927_arm70cm_height170cm_......",
These input strings are provided by many different users.
Leading "collect_" is fixed, and then follows "${project_version}" which doesn't have hard rule to set this variable, the naming will be very different by different users.
Then, there will be repeating "${part}${length}cm_.......", but the number of repeatence is not fixed.
I'd like to capture the the variable ${project_version}.
Then, I try using the following re.match to capture it.
re.match(r'collect_(.*)_(?:(?:foot|arm|height)\d+cm_)+.*' , string)
However, the result is not as expected.
Is there anyone give me a hint that what's wrong in my regular expression?
Assuming you were only planning to capture the part preceding the various cm suffixed components, the reason you're capturing so many of them instead of just checking and discarding them is that regexes are greedy by default.
You can narrow your capture group to only match what you really expect (e.g. just a name followed by a date), replacing (.*) with something like ((?:[a-z]+[0-9]*_)*\d{8}).
Alternatively, you can be lazy and enable non-greedy matching for the capture group, changing (.*) to (.*?) where the ? says to only take the minimal amount required to satisfy the regex. The latter is more brittle, but if you really can't impose any other restrictions on the expression for the capture group, it's what you've got.
Use a non-greedy quantifier. Otherwise, the capture group will match as far as it can, so it will keep going until the last match for (?:foot|arm|height)\d+cm_).
result = re.match(r'collect_(.*?)_(?:(?:foot|arm|height)\d+cm_)+' , string)
print(result.group(1)) # project_stage1_20220927
The regex "(.*)" will capture far too much.
re.match(r'collect_([a-z0-9]+_[a-z0-9]+_[a-z0-9]+)_(?:(?:foot|arm|height)\d+cm_)+' , string)
When working on this string:
see.Ya23.v2.0023.jpg
I already found out I could get the last occurence of a number by using:
(?P<Frame>\d+(?!.*\d))
It gives me the group containing "0023".
But how do I group everything until that happens?
If I do this:
(?P<Sequence>.*)(?P<Frame>\d+(?!.*\d))
My two groups contain "see.Ya23.v2.002" and "3", when I would like to have to have them contain "see.Ya23.v2." and "0023".
Hope you can help me. Thanks in advance.
You almost got it completely.
just in the first group you can add the lazy indicator ? after any match. that causes to drop the selection at the first possible possition.
(?P<Sequence>.*?)(?P<Frame>\d+(?!.*\d))
this will give you
see.Ya23.v2. and 0023
and if you also want to avoid selecting the dot
(?P<Sequence>.*?)\.(?P<Frame>\d+(?!.*\d))
the result is see.Ya23.v2 and 0023
The simplest and quickest way is to put a negative assertion for a digit
before your digit expression at the start of the Frame group.
This will make sure the Frame is the last complete set of digits and
still allow a greedy Sequence match which give a performance boost.
(?P<Sequence>.*)(?P<Frame>(?<!\d)\d+(?!.*\d))
https://regex101.com/r/LCUoCR/1
The problem is explained in my Youtube video related to how backtracking works in regex.
In short: the .* part matches the whole string first, and then the regex engine starts stepping back through the string to accommodate a part for the subsequent patterns, i.e. for \d+(?!.*\d). Once the 3 is found in see.Ya23.v2.0023.jpg, this pattern matches, and the regex engine returns a match.
All you need is to make sure the char before the \d+ is a non-digit char and you need to use
(?P<Sequence>(?:.*\D)?)(?P<Frame>\d+)(?!.*\d)
See the regex demo.