Re: regex help wanted

From: matt(at)byrney(dot)com
To: "Jasen Betts" <jasen(at)xnet(dot)co(dot)nz>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: regex help wanted
Date: 2013-04-28 17:29:44
Message-ID: bae5a6ebce3e67ef0fd79a3d3c880727.squirrel@mail.byrney.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> On 2013-04-25, Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:32:26AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>>> > What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a
>>> > substring ?
>>>
>>> > select substring ('junk $<allergy::test::99>$ junk' from
>>> '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$');
>>>
>>> There's a perfectly valid match in which [^<]+? matches allergy::test
>>> and [^:]+? matches 99.
>>
>> Tom, thanks for helping !
>>
>> I would have thought "<[^<]+?:" should mean:
>>
>> match a "<"
>> followed by 1-n characters as long as they are not "<"
>> until the VERY NEXT ":"
>
>
> if you want that say: "<[^<:]+:"
>
>> The "?" should make the "+" after "[^<]" non-greedy and thus
>> stop at the first occurrence of ":", right ? Or am I
>> misunderstanding that part ?

Greediness and non-greediness of operators are like hints - they are only
honoured if there is a choice in the matter. In your case, if the
<[^<]+?: stopped at the first ":", it would be impossible to match the
rest of the pattern.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martín Marqués 2013-04-28 19:18:18 Re: apt.postgresql.org broken dependency?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-04-28 15:22:46 Re: Missing WAL files - file-based replication