Regular expression

[davranfor]

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-
-

Thanks ;)

[Rik Wasmus]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <da*******@gmai l.comwrote:

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.
--
Rik Wasmus

[davranfor]

On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:

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.
--
Rik Wasmus

thanks ;)))

[davranfor]

On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:

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.
--
Rik Wasmus

works like a charm, can you explain the simple way without check zero
at start?

thanks again

[Rik Wasmus]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:50:59 +0200, <da*******@gmai l.comwrote:

On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

>On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:

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

[davranfor]

On 17 oct, 21:10, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:50:59 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:

On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:
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

[Steve]

<da*******@gmai l.comwrote in message
news:11******** **************@ q5g2000prf.goog legroups.com...

On 17 oct, 21:10, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

>On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:50:59 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:

On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:
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
underestimat e the power of /x: comments in the regex itself, indentation
to keep things clear, it does wonders. It also keeps you from
rediscoverin g 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.

[davranfor]

On 18 oct, 05:40, "Steve" <no....@example .comwrote:

<davran...@gmai l.comwrote in message

news:11******** **************@ q5g2000prf.goog legroups.com...

On 17 oct, 21:10, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:50:59 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:
On 17 oct, 20:20, "Rik Wasmus" <luiheidsgoe... @hotmail.comwro te:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:49 +0200, <davran...@gmai l.comwrote:
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.java script), 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

[davranfor]

>you had two responses...one of

>which (not mine, btw), is much more simply expressed than rik's

Steve , not much more simply expressed

"1-9" and "\d" are identical ;)

[Captain Paralytic]

On 18 Oct, 04:40, "Steve" <no....@example .comwrote:

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.

Actually Steve, if he had "cross-posted" ti wouldn't have been a
problem as both groups would have seen the responses.

So Dave, in future if you want to ask in 2 groups, do cross-post.

What you did in this case was multi-post.

See http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm