As an exercise, I'm working on an accent translation dictionary. My dictionary is contained in a hash, and I'm thinking of using #gsub! to run inputted strings through the translator.
I'm wondering if there's any way to make the substitutions case-sensitive. For example, I want "didja" to translate to "did you" and "Didja" to translate to "Did you", but I don't want to have to create multiple dictionary entries to deal with case.
I know I can use regex syntax to find strings to replace case-insensitively, with str.gsub!(/#{x}/i,dictionary[x]) where x is a variable. The problem is that this replaces "Didja" with "did you", rather than matching the original case.
Is there any way to make it match the original case?
Suppose we have:
a method to_key that converts a string str to a key in a hash DICTIONARY; and
a method transform that converts the pair [str, DICTIONARY[to_key(str)]] to the replacement for str.
Then str is to be replaced with:
transform(str, DICTIONARY[to_key(str)]])
Without lose of generality, I think we can assume that DICTIONARY's keys and values are all of the same case (say, lower case) and that to_key is simply:
def to_key(str)
str.downcase
end
So all that is necessary is to define the method transform. However, the specification provided does not imply a unique mapping. We therefore must decide what transform should do.
For example, suppose the rule is simply that, if the first character of str and the first character of the dictionary value are both letters, the latter is to be converted to upper case if the former is upper case. Then:
def transform(str, dict_value)
(str[0] =~ /[A-Z]/) ? dict_value.capitalize : dict_value
end
(I originally had dict_value[0] = dict_value[0].upcase if..., but came to my senses after reading #sawa's answer.)
Note that if DICTIONARY['cat'] => 'dog', 'Cat' will be converted to 'Dog'.
One might think that another possibility is that all characters of str that are letters should maintain their case. This is problematic, however, as the dictionary mapping may (without further specification) remove letters, and it may not be clear from DICTIONARY[str] which letters of str were removed, some of which may be lower case and others upper case.
It is not clear what capitalization patterns you have in mind. I assume that you only need to deal with words that are all low case or all low case except the first letter.
str.gsub!(/#{x}/i){|x| x.downcase! ? dictionary[x].capitalize : dictionary[x]}
I don't think this is possible since in this scenario you need to specify the exact string that must take place of the replaced string.
With that in mind, this is the best I can suggest:
subs = {'didja' => 'did you'}
subs.clone.each{ |k, v| subs[k.capitalize] = v.capitalize }
# if you want to replace all occurrences i.e. even substrings:
regex = /#{subs.keys.join('|')}/
# if you want to remove complete words only: (as the Tin man points out)
regex = /\b(?:#{subs.keys.join('|')})\b/ # \b checks for word-boundaries
"didja Didja".gsub(regex, subs)
Update:
Because in your example, the case-sensitive character isn't to be replaced by another value, you could use this:
regex = /(?<=(d))idja/i # again, keep in mind the substrings
"didja Didja".gsub(regex, "id you")
Related
I have the following string
str = "feminino blue"
I need to know if there is a string called "mini" inside this string.
When I use include? method, the return is true because "feMINino" has "min"
Is there a way to search for the exact word that is passed as param?
Thanks
Sounds like a use case for regular expressions, which can match all kinds of more complex string patterns. You can read through that page for all the specifics (and it's very valuable to learn, not just as a Ruby concept; Regexes are used in almost every modern language), but this should cover your use case.
/\bmini\b/ =~ str
\b means "match a word boundary", so exactly one of the things to the left or right should be a word character and the other side should not (i.e. should be whitespace or the beginning/end of the string).
This will return nil if there's no match or the index of the match if there is one. Since nil is falsy and all numbers are truthy, this return value is safe to use in an if statement if all you need is a yes/no answer.
If the string you're working with is not constant and is instead in a variable called, say, my_word, you can interpolate it.
/\b#{Regexp.quote(my_word)}\b/ =~ str
The DNS entries i am trying to validate are quite long. Here's an example of what the structure might look like:
qwer-0123a4bcd567890e1-uuuuu3xx.qwer-gfd-1e098765dcb4a3210.ps-sdlk-6.qwer.domain.com
These entries can be thought of as three distinct parts:
qwer-0123a4bcd567890e1-uuuuu3xx.qwer-gfd-1e098765dcb4a3210.
Always starts with qwer-
Followed by 17 alphanumerics, a -, 8 more alphanumerics
Followed by qwer-gfd-
Followed by 17 more alphanumerics and a .
ps-sdlk-6
Always starts with ps-sdlk-
Followed by either one or two alphanumeric. In this case it could be ps-sdlk-6 or something like ps-sdlk-6e
.qwer.domain.com
The domain target always ends with .qwer.domain.com
I've been hacking together a regex and came up with this monstrosity:
qwer-[\w]{17}-[\w]{8}.qwer-gfd-[\w]{17}.(.*)(qwer.domain.com)
That solution is pretty hideous and it returns multiple match groups which doesn't give me much confidence in the accuracy. I'm using ruby 2.5 but non std lib stuff is difficult to import in this case.
Is there a more sensible and complete/accurate regex to confirm the validity of these dns targets? Is there a better way to do this without regex?
Considering the complexity of testing longish regular expressions, and also the possibility--if not the probability--that changes will be needed in future, I would be inclined to split the string on hyphens and test each string in the resulting array.
PIECES = [['qwer'],
['0123a4bcd567890e1'.size],
['uuuuu3xx'.size, '.qwer'],
['gfd'],
['1e098765dcb4a3210'.size, '.ps'],
['sdlk'],
[[1, 2], '.qwer.domain.com']].
map do |a|
Regexp.new(
a.each_with_object('\A') do |o,s|
case o
when String
s << o.gsub('.', '\.')
when Integer
s << "\\p{Alnum}{#{o}}"
else # array
s << "\\p{Alnum}{#{o.first},#{o.last}}"
end
end << '\z')
end
#=> [/\Aqwer\z/, /\A\p{Alnum}{17}\z/, /\A\p{Alnum}{8}\.qwer\z/,
# /\Agfd\z/, /\A\p{Alnum}{17}\.ps\z/, /\Asdlk\z/,
# /\A\p{Alnum}{1,2}\.qwer\.domain\.com\z/]
Notice that I've used single quotes in most places to be able to write, for example, '\A' rather than "\\A". However, double quotes are needed for the two lines where interpolation is performed (#{o}). I've also used strings from the example to determine the lengths of various runs of alphanumeric characters and have escaped periods and added anchors in simple code. I did that to both reduce the chance of counting errors and help readers of the code understand what is being done. Though the elements of PIECES (regular expressions) are here being used to test the string used to construct PIECES that is of course irrelevant, assuming, as we must, that all strings to be tested will have the same pattern.
def valid?(str)
arr = str.split('-')
return false unless arr.size == PIECES.size
arr.zip(PIECES).all? { |s,r| s.match? r }
end
If Enumerable#all?'s block returns false all? immediately returns false. This is sometimes referred to as short-circuiting behaviour.
For the string given in the example, str,
valid?(str)
#=> true
Note the following intermediate calculation.
str.split('-').zip(PIECES)
#=> [["qwer", /\Aqwer\z/],
# ["0123a4bcd567890e1", /\A\p{Alnum}{17}\z/],
# ["uuuuu3xx.qwer", /\A\p{Alnum}{8}\.qwer\z/],
# ["gfd", /\Agfd\z/],
# ["1e098765dcb4a3210.ps", /\A\p{Alnum}{17}\.ps\z/],
# ["sdlk", /\Asdlk\z/],
# ["6.qwer.domain.com", /\A\p{Alnum}{1,2}\.qwer\.domain\.com\z/]]
This may seem overkill (and I'm not certain it isn't), but it does facilitate debugging and testing and if, in future, the string pattern changes (within limits) it should be relatively easy to modify the matching test (by changing the array of arrays above from which PIECES is derived).
I think given your input data you have no choice but an ugly regex e.g.
^qwer-\w{17}-\w{8}\.qwer-gfd-\w{17}\.ps-sdlk-\w{1,2}\.qwer\.domain\.com$
Note that I have used \w as you did, however \w also matches _ as well as alphanumeric characters, so you may want to replace it with [A-Za-z0-9]. Also, . will match any character, so to specifically match a . you need \. in your regex.
Demo on regex101.com
I'm too ambitious or is there a way do this
to add a string if not present ?
and
remove a the same string if present?
Do all of this using Regex and avoid the if else statement
Here an example
I have string
"admin,artist,location_manager,event_manager"
so can the substring location_manager be added or removed with regards to above conditions
basically I'm looking to avoid the if else statement and do all of this plainly in regex
"admin,artist,location_manager,event_manager".test(/some_regex/)
The some_regex will remove location_manager from the string if present else it will add it
Am I over over ambitions
You will need to use some sort of logic.
str += ',location_manager' unless str.gsub!(/location_manager,/,'')
I'm assuming that if it's not present you append it to the end of the string
Regex will not actually add or remove anything in any language that I am aware of. It is simply used to match. You must use some other language construct (a regex based replacement function for example) to achieve this functionality. It would probably help to mention your specific language so as to get help from those users.
Here's one kinda off-the-wall solution. It doesn't use regexes, but it also doesn't use any if/else statements either. It's more academic than production-worthy.
Assumptions: Your string is a comma-separated list of titles, and that these are a unique set (no duplicates), and that order doesn't matter:
titles = Set.new(str.split(','))
#=> #<Set: {"admin", "artist", "location_manager", "event_manager"}>
titles_to_toggle = ["location_manager"]
#=> ["location_manager"]
titles ^= titles_to_toggle
#=> #<Set: {"admin", "artist", "event_manager"}>
titles ^= titles_to_toggle
#=> #<Set: {"location_manager", "admin", "artist", "event_manager"}>
titles.to_a.join(",")
#=> "location_manager,admin,artist,event_manager"
All this assumes that you're using a string as a kind of set. If so, you should probably just use a set. If not, and you actually need string-manipulation functions to operate on it, there's probably no way around except for using if-else, or a variant, such as the ternary operator, or unless, or Bergi's answer
Also worth noting regarding regex as a solution: Make sure you consider the edge cases. If 'location_manager' is in the middle of the string, will you remove the extraneous comma? Will you handle removing commas correctly if it's at the beginning or the end of the string? Will you correctly add commas when it's added? For these reasons treating a set as a set or array instead of a string makes more sense.
No. Regex can only match/test whether "a string" is present (or not). Then, the function you've used can do something based on that result, for example replace can remove a match.
Yet, you want to do two actions (each can be done with regex), remove if present and add if not. You can't execute them sequentially, because they overlap - you need to execute either the one or the other. This is where if-else structures (or ternary operators) come into play, and they are required if there is no library/native function that contains them to do exactly this job. I doubt there is one in Ruby.
If you want to avoid the if-else-statement (for one-liners or expressions), you can use the ternary operator. Or, you can use a labda expression returning the correct value:
# kind of pseudo code
string.replace(/location,?|$/, function($0) return $0 ? "" : ",location" )
This matches the string "location" (with optional comma) or the string end, and replaces that with nothing if a match was found or the string ",location" otherwise. I'm sure you can adapt this to Ruby.
to remove something matching a pattern is really easy:
(admin,?|artist,?|location_manager,?|event_manager,?)
then choose the string to replace the match -in your case an empty string- and pass everything to the replace method.
The other operation you suggested was more difficult to achieve with regex only. Maybe someone knows a better answer
At the moment I have a regular expression that looks like this:
^(cat|dog|bird){1}(cat|dog|bird)?(cat|dog|bird)?$
It matches at least 1, and at most 3 instances of a long list of words and makes the matching words for each group available via the corresponding variable.
Is there a way to revise this so that I can return the result for each word in the string without specifying the number of groups beforehand?
^(cat|dog|bird)+$
works but only returns the last match separately , because there is only one group.
OK, so I found a solution to this.
It doesn't look like it is possible to create an unknown number of groups, so I went digging for another way of achieving the desired outcome: To be able to tell if a string was made up of words in a given list; and to match the longest words possible in each position.
I have been reading Mastering Regular Expressions by Jeffrey E. F. Friedl and it shed some light on things for me. It turns out that NFA based Regexp engines (like the one used in Ruby) are sequential as well as lazy/greedy. This means that you can dictate how a pattern is matched using the order in which you give it choices. This explains why scan was returning variable results, it was looking for the first word in the list that matched the criteria and then moved on to the next match. By design it was not looking for the longest match, but the first one. So in order to rectify this all I needed to do was reorder the array of words used to generate the regular expression from alphabetical order, to length order (longest to shortest).
array = %w[ as ascarid car id ]
list = array.sort_by {|word| -word.length }
regexp = Regexp.union(list)
Now the first match found by scan will be the longest word available. It is also pretty simple to tell if a string contains only words in the list using scan:
if "ascarid".scan(regexp).join.length == word.length
return true
else
return false
end
Thanks to everyone that posted in response to this question, I hope that this will help others in the future.
You could do it in two steps:
Use /^(cat|dog|bird)+$/ (or better /\A(cat|dog|bird)+\z/) to make sure it matches.
Then string.scan(/cat|dog|bird/) to get the pieces.
You could also use split and a Set to do both at once. Suppose you have your words in the array a and your string in s, then:
words = Set.new(a)
re = /(#{a.map{|w| Regexp.quote(w)}.join('|')})/
parts = s.split(re).reject(&:empty?)
if(parts.any? {|w| !words.include?(w) })
# 's' didn't match what you expected so throw a
# hissy fit, format the hard drive, set fire to
# the backups, or whatever is appropriate.
else
# Everything you were looking for is in 'parts'
# so you can check the length (if you care about
# how many matches there were) or something useful
# and productive.
end
When you use split with a pattern that contains groups then
the respective matches will be returned in the array as well.
In this case, the split will hand us something like ["", "cat", "", "dog"] and the empty strings will only occur between the separators that we're looking for and so we can reject them and pretend they don't exist. This may be an unexpected use of split since we're more interested in the delimiters more than what is being delimited (except to make sure that nothing is being delimited) but it gets the job done.
Based on your comments, it looks like you want an ordered alternation so that (ascarid|car|as|id) would try to match from left to right. I can't find anything in the Ruby Oniguruma (the Ruby 1.9 regex engine) docs that says that | is ordered or unordered; Perl's alternation appears to be specified (or at least strongly implied) to be ordered and Ruby's certainly behaves as though it is ordered:
>> 'pancakes' =~ /(pan|pancakes)/; puts $1
pan
So you could sort your words from longest to shortest when building your regex:
re = /(#{a.sort_by{|w| -w.length}.map{|w| Regexp.quote(w)}.join('|')})/
and hope that Oniguruma really will match alternations from left to right. AFAIK, Ruby's regexes will be eager because they support backreferences and lazy/non-greedy matching so this approach should be safe.
Or you could be properly paranoid and parse it in steps; first you'd make sure your string looks like what you want:
if(s !~ /\A(#{a.map{|w| Regexp.quote(w)}.join('|')})+\z/)
# Bail out and complain that 's' doesn't look right
end
The group your words by length:
by_length = a.group_by(&:length)
and scan for the groups from the longest words to the shortest words:
# This loses the order of the substrings within 's'...
matches = [ ]
by_length.keys.sort_by { |k| -k }.each do |group|
re = /(#{a.map{|w| Regexp.quote(w)}.join('|')})/
s.gsub!(re) { |w| matches.push(w); '' }
end
# 's' should now be empty and the matched substrings will be
# in 'matches'
There is still room for possible overlaps in these approaches but at least you'd be extracting the longest matches.
If you need to repeat parts of a regex, one option is to store the repeated part in a variable and just reference that, for example:
r = "(cat|dog|bird)"
str.match(/#{r}#{r}?#{r}?/)
You can do it with .Net regular expressions. If I write the following in PowerShell
$pat = [regex] "^(cat|dog|bird)+$"
$m = $pat.match('birddogcatbird')
$m.groups[1].captures | %{$_.value}
then I get
bird
dog
cat
bird
when I run it. I know even less about IronRuby than I do about PowerShell, but perhaps this means you can do it in IronRuby as well.
I'm not sure how to use regular expressions in a function so that I could grab all the words in a sentence starting with a particular letter. I know that I can do:
word =~ /^#{letter}/
to check if the word starts with the letter, but how do I go from word to word. Do I need to convert the string to an array and then iterate through each word or is there a faster way using regex? I'm using ruby so that would look like:
matching_words = Array.new
sentance.split(" ").each do |word|
matching_words.push(word) if word =~ /^#{letter}/
end
Scan may be a good tool for this:
#!/usr/bin/ruby1.8
s = "I think Paris in the spring is a beautiful place"
p s.scan(/\b[it][[:alpha:]]*/i)
# => ["I", "think", "in", "the", "is"]
\b means 'word boundary."
[:alpha:] means upper or lowercase alpha (a-z).
You can use \b. It matches word boundaries--the invisible spot just before and after a word. (You can't see them, but oh they're there!) Here's the regex:
/\b(a\w*)\b/
The \w matches a word character, like letters and digits and stuff like that.
You can see me testing it here: http://rubular.com/regexes/13347
Similar to Anon.'s answer:
/\b(a\w*)/g
and then see all the results with (usually) $n, where n is the n-th hit. Many libraries will return /g results as arrays on the $n-th set of parenthesis, so in this case $1 would return an array of all the matching words. You'll want to double-check with whatever library you're using to figure out how it returns matches like this, there's a lot of variation on global search returns, sadly.
As to the \w vs [a-zA-Z], you can sometimes get faster execution by using the built-in definitions of things like that, as it can easily have an optimized path for the preset character classes.
The /g at the end makes it a "global" search, so it'll find more than one. It's still restricted by line in some languages / libraries, though, so if you wish to check an entire file you'll sometimes need /gm, to make it multi-line
If you want to remove results, like your title (but not question) suggests, try:
/\ba\w*//g
which does a search-and-replace in most languages (/<search>/<replacement>/). Sometimes you need a "s" at the front. Depends on the language / library. In Ruby's case, use:
string.gsub(/(\b)a\w*(\b)/, "\\1\\2")
to retain the non-word characters, and optionally put any replacement text between \1 and \2. gsub for global, sub for the first result.
/\ba[a-z]*\b/i
will match any word starting with 'a'.
The \b indicates a word boundary - we want to only match starting from the beginning of a word, after all.
Then there's the character we want our word to start with.
Then we have as many as possible letter characters, followed by another word boundary.
To match all words starting with t, use:
\bt\w+
That will match test but not footest; \b means "word boundary".
Personally i think that regex is overkill for this application, simply running a select is more than capable of solving this particular problem.
"this is a test".split(' ').select{ |word| word[0,1] == 't' }
result => ["this", "test"]
or if you are determined to use regex then go with grep
"this is a test".split(' ').grep(/^t/)
result => ["this", "test"]
Hope this helps.