Match exactly strings in any order [duplicate]
This question already has an answer here:
RegEx match open tags except XHTML self-contained tags
35 answers
I want to match strings with the following template:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
I can match them with a regex such as:
^(<els+)(?=.*key1=".*".*)(?=.*key2=".*".*)(.*/>$)
The problem is that
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" aaa />
<el key1="val1" aa key2="val2" />
<el aaa key1="val1" key2="val2" />
are also matches. I want to find ^<els+ exactly at the beginning, (/>)$ at the end and the two s+keyn=".*"s+ somewhere in between.
EDIT:
(based on comments and replies) Keys can be title, uri, text. The issue with the answers so far is the keys can be in any order, so:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
<el key2="val2" key1="val1" />
are both valid.
regex regex-lookarounds
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
marked as duplicate by Wiktor Stribiżew, Toto regex
Users with the regex badge can single-handedly close regex questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Jan 19 at 14:58
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
add a comment |
This question already has an answer here:
RegEx match open tags except XHTML self-contained tags
35 answers
I want to match strings with the following template:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
I can match them with a regex such as:
^(<els+)(?=.*key1=".*".*)(?=.*key2=".*".*)(.*/>$)
The problem is that
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" aaa />
<el key1="val1" aa key2="val2" />
<el aaa key1="val1" key2="val2" />
are also matches. I want to find ^<els+ exactly at the beginning, (/>)$ at the end and the two s+keyn=".*"s+ somewhere in between.
EDIT:
(based on comments and replies) Keys can be title, uri, text. The issue with the answers so far is the keys can be in any order, so:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
<el key2="val2" key1="val1" />
are both valid.
regex regex-lookarounds
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
marked as duplicate by Wiktor Stribiżew, Toto regex
Users with the regex badge can single-handedly close regex questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Jan 19 at 14:58
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
can you elaborate more on how your keys will look like? Will it be key1 and key2 for all strings and will they be in order? key1 followed by key2?
– Kannappan Sirchabesan
Jan 19 at 14:14
@KannappanSirchabesan see my edit
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:29
Have you considered stackoverflow.com/a/1732454/2988730?
– Mad Physicist
Jan 19 at 14:35
@MadPhysicist love it, thank you
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:41
add a comment |
This question already has an answer here:
RegEx match open tags except XHTML self-contained tags
35 answers
I want to match strings with the following template:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
I can match them with a regex such as:
^(<els+)(?=.*key1=".*".*)(?=.*key2=".*".*)(.*/>$)
The problem is that
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" aaa />
<el key1="val1" aa key2="val2" />
<el aaa key1="val1" key2="val2" />
are also matches. I want to find ^<els+ exactly at the beginning, (/>)$ at the end and the two s+keyn=".*"s+ somewhere in between.
EDIT:
(based on comments and replies) Keys can be title, uri, text. The issue with the answers so far is the keys can be in any order, so:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
<el key2="val2" key1="val1" />
are both valid.
regex regex-lookarounds
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
This question already has an answer here:
RegEx match open tags except XHTML self-contained tags
35 answers
I want to match strings with the following template:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
I can match them with a regex such as:
^(<els+)(?=.*key1=".*".*)(?=.*key2=".*".*)(.*/>$)
The problem is that
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" aaa />
<el key1="val1" aa key2="val2" />
<el aaa key1="val1" key2="val2" />
are also matches. I want to find ^<els+ exactly at the beginning, (/>)$ at the end and the two s+keyn=".*"s+ somewhere in between.
EDIT:
(based on comments and replies) Keys can be title, uri, text. The issue with the answers so far is the keys can be in any order, so:
<el key1="val1" key2="val2" />
<el key2="val2" key1="val1" />
are both valid.
This question already has an answer here:
RegEx match open tags except XHTML self-contained tags
35 answers
regex regex-lookarounds
regex regex-lookarounds
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
edited Jan 19 at 14:29
cahenepudi
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
asked Jan 19 at 13:52
cahenepudicahenepudi
113
113
marked as duplicate by Wiktor Stribiżew, Toto regex
Users with the regex badge can single-handedly close regex questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Jan 19 at 14:58
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by Wiktor Stribiżew, Toto regex
Users with the regex badge can single-handedly close regex questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Jan 19 at 14:58
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
can you elaborate more on how your keys will look like? Will it be key1 and key2 for all strings and will they be in order? key1 followed by key2?
– Kannappan Sirchabesan
Jan 19 at 14:14
@KannappanSirchabesan see my edit
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:29
Have you considered stackoverflow.com/a/1732454/2988730?
– Mad Physicist
Jan 19 at 14:35
@MadPhysicist love it, thank you
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:41
add a comment |
can you elaborate more on how your keys will look like? Will it be key1 and key2 for all strings and will they be in order? key1 followed by key2?
– Kannappan Sirchabesan
Jan 19 at 14:14
@KannappanSirchabesan see my edit
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:29
Have you considered stackoverflow.com/a/1732454/2988730?
– Mad Physicist
Jan 19 at 14:35
@MadPhysicist love it, thank you
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:41
can you elaborate more on how your keys will look like? Will it be key1 and key2 for all strings and will they be in order? key1 followed by key2?
– Kannappan Sirchabesan
Jan 19 at 14:14
can you elaborate more on how your keys will look like? Will it be key1 and key2 for all strings and will they be in order? key1 followed by key2?
– Kannappan Sirchabesan
Jan 19 at 14:14
@KannappanSirchabesan see my edit
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:29
@KannappanSirchabesan see my edit
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:29
Have you considered stackoverflow.com/a/1732454/2988730?
– Mad Physicist
Jan 19 at 14:35
Have you considered stackoverflow.com/a/1732454/2988730?
– Mad Physicist
Jan 19 at 14:35
@MadPhysicist love it, thank you
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:41
@MadPhysicist love it, thank you
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:41
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
You should really use an XML parser of your language, because the things that you don't want to match are all invalid XML tags, so they can be ruled out easily. You just need to check for the tag name being el, and having only 2 attributes key1 and key2.
If you insist on regex, here is one that should work:
^<els+key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"s+/>$
The main difference between this and your attempt is that your attempt uses too many lookaheads. Why are you using lookaheads? Normal matching should be fine. You lookahead for key1=".*?" and then match .* greedily, which seems quite redundant. Therefore, I deleted the lookaheads and .*s. And it only matches the string you want.
If you also want to match strings where key2 appears before key1, the regex becomes much longer:
^<els+(?:key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"|key2=".*?"s+key1=".*?")s+/>$
This is why I said you should use a XML parser.
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
add a comment |
Here is a regex that could work
^(<el)s+(S+=".*")s+(S+=".*")s+(/>$)
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You should really use an XML parser of your language, because the things that you don't want to match are all invalid XML tags, so they can be ruled out easily. You just need to check for the tag name being el, and having only 2 attributes key1 and key2.
If you insist on regex, here is one that should work:
^<els+key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"s+/>$
The main difference between this and your attempt is that your attempt uses too many lookaheads. Why are you using lookaheads? Normal matching should be fine. You lookahead for key1=".*?" and then match .* greedily, which seems quite redundant. Therefore, I deleted the lookaheads and .*s. And it only matches the string you want.
If you also want to match strings where key2 appears before key1, the regex becomes much longer:
^<els+(?:key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"|key2=".*?"s+key1=".*?")s+/>$
This is why I said you should use a XML parser.
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
add a comment |
You should really use an XML parser of your language, because the things that you don't want to match are all invalid XML tags, so they can be ruled out easily. You just need to check for the tag name being el, and having only 2 attributes key1 and key2.
If you insist on regex, here is one that should work:
^<els+key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"s+/>$
The main difference between this and your attempt is that your attempt uses too many lookaheads. Why are you using lookaheads? Normal matching should be fine. You lookahead for key1=".*?" and then match .* greedily, which seems quite redundant. Therefore, I deleted the lookaheads and .*s. And it only matches the string you want.
If you also want to match strings where key2 appears before key1, the regex becomes much longer:
^<els+(?:key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"|key2=".*?"s+key1=".*?")s+/>$
This is why I said you should use a XML parser.
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
add a comment |
You should really use an XML parser of your language, because the things that you don't want to match are all invalid XML tags, so they can be ruled out easily. You just need to check for the tag name being el, and having only 2 attributes key1 and key2.
If you insist on regex, here is one that should work:
^<els+key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"s+/>$
The main difference between this and your attempt is that your attempt uses too many lookaheads. Why are you using lookaheads? Normal matching should be fine. You lookahead for key1=".*?" and then match .* greedily, which seems quite redundant. Therefore, I deleted the lookaheads and .*s. And it only matches the string you want.
If you also want to match strings where key2 appears before key1, the regex becomes much longer:
^<els+(?:key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"|key2=".*?"s+key1=".*?")s+/>$
This is why I said you should use a XML parser.
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
You should really use an XML parser of your language, because the things that you don't want to match are all invalid XML tags, so they can be ruled out easily. You just need to check for the tag name being el, and having only 2 attributes key1 and key2.
If you insist on regex, here is one that should work:
^<els+key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"s+/>$
The main difference between this and your attempt is that your attempt uses too many lookaheads. Why are you using lookaheads? Normal matching should be fine. You lookahead for key1=".*?" and then match .* greedily, which seems quite redundant. Therefore, I deleted the lookaheads and .*s. And it only matches the string you want.
If you also want to match strings where key2 appears before key1, the regex becomes much longer:
^<els+(?:key1=".*?"s+key2=".*?"|key2=".*?"s+key1=".*?")s+/>$
This is why I said you should use a XML parser.
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
answered Jan 19 at 14:24
SweeperSweeper
66.7k1073139
66.7k1073139
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
add a comment |
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
Is it not feasible with lookarounds in the way I was doing? Your second answer looks like what I was looking for, but if it becomes too long I will take your suggestion for the XML parser
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:31
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
It is feasible, but it'll even longer. You'd have to lookahead for something, then match that something. This is quite redundant, because why not just straight up say "match something"? which is what my regex does. @cahenepudi
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:34
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
@cahenepudi If you think an answers your question, please consider accepting it by clicking on that checkmark!
– Sweeper
Jan 19 at 14:35
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
Accepting after reading why not to use regexps for parsing XML, although this solution in my case would work.
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:42
add a comment |
Here is a regex that could work
^(<el)s+(S+=".*")s+(S+=".*")s+(/>$)
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
add a comment |
Here is a regex that could work
^(<el)s+(S+=".*")s+(S+=".*")s+(/>$)
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
add a comment |
Here is a regex that could work
^(<el)s+(S+=".*")s+(S+=".*")s+(/>$)
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
Here is a regex that could work
^(<el)s+(S+=".*")s+(S+=".*")s+(/>$)
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
edited Jan 19 at 14:33
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
answered Jan 19 at 14:21
Kannappan SirchabesanKannappan Sirchabesan
562413
562413
add a comment |
add a comment |
can you elaborate more on how your keys will look like? Will it be key1 and key2 for all strings and will they be in order? key1 followed by key2?
– Kannappan Sirchabesan
Jan 19 at 14:14
@KannappanSirchabesan see my edit
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:29
Have you considered stackoverflow.com/a/1732454/2988730?
– Mad Physicist
Jan 19 at 14:35
@MadPhysicist love it, thank you
– cahenepudi
Jan 19 at 14:41