I was wondering how you construct the regular expression to check if the string has a variation of a pattern with the same length. Say the string is "door boor robo omanyte" how do I return the words that have the variation of [door]?
You can easily get all the possible words using Array#permutation. Then you can scan for them in provided string. Here:
possible_words = %w[d o o r].permutation.map &:join
# => ["door", "doro", "door", "doro", "droo", "droo", "odor", "odro", "oodr", "oord", "ordo", "orod", "odor", "odro", "oodr", "oord", "ordo", "orod", "rdoo", "rdoo", "rodo", "rood", "rodo", "rood"]
string = "door boor robo omanyte"
string.scan(possible_words.join("|"))
# => ["door"]
string = "door close rood example ordo"
string.scan(possible_words.join("|"))
# => ["door", "rood", "ordo"]
UPDATE
You can improve scan further by looking for word boundary. Here:
string = "doorrood example ordo"
string.scan(/"\b#{possible_words.join('\b|\b')}\b"/)
# => ["ordo"]
NOTE
As Cary correctly pointed out in comments below, this process is quite inefficient if you intend to find permutation for a fairly large string. However it should work fine for OP's example.
If the comment I left on your question correctly interprets the question, you could do this:
str = "door sit its odor to"
str.split
.group_by { |w| w.chars.sort.join }
.values
.select { |a| a.size > 1 }
#=> [["door", "odor"], ["sit", "its"]]
This assumes all the letters are the same case.
If case is not important, just make a small change:
str = "dooR sIt itS Odor to"
str.split
.group_by { |w| w.downcase.chars.sort.join }
.values
.select { |a| a.size > 1 }
#=> [["dooR", "Odor"], ["sIt", "itS"]]
In my opinion the fastest way to find this will be
word_a.chars.sort == word_b.chars.sort
since we are using the same characters inside the words
IMO, some kind of iteration is definitely necessary to build a regular expression to match this one. Not using a regular expression is better too.
def variations_of_substr(str, sub)
# Creates regexp to match words with same length, and
# with same characters of str.
patt = "\\b" + ( [ "[#{sub}]{1}" ] * sub.size ).join + "\\b"
# Above alone won't be enough, characters in both words should
# match exactly.
str.scan( Regexp.new(patt) ).select do |m|
m.chars.sort == sub.chars.sort
end
end
variations_of_substr("door boor robo omanyte", "door")
# => ["door"]
Related
I have a coding problem I solved and want to refactor. I know there has to be a cleaner way of doing what I did.
The goal is to write a method that takes a string of "!" and "?" and reduces the string by eliminating all odd groupings of each symbol.
Example - a string "????!!!" would have an odd grouping of "!!!" because there are three in a row. These would be deleted from the string.
If there is only one "!" or "?" its left because it is not in a group.
Ex -
remove("!????!!!?") answer == "!"
# => ("!????!!!?" --> "!?????" --> "!")
In the first string, the only odd grouping is "!!!", once removed, it leaves a new string with an odd grouping "?????". You remove the next odd grouping so you're left with "!". This fits the desired output.
Another example
remove("!???!!") == ""
# => ("!???!!" --> "!!!" --> "")
Current code:
def remove(s)
arr = [s]
i = 0
until i == arr[0].length
s = s.chars.chunk{|c|c}.map{ |n,a| a.join }.select{|x| x if x.length.even? || x.length <= 1}.join
arr << s
i += 1
end
return arr[-1]
end
My code solves this problem and all test cases. I have a suspicion that my until loop can be removed/refactored so that I could solve this problem in one line and have spent hours trying to figure it out with no luck.
Suppose
str = "???!!!???!"
If we first remove the two groups "???" we are left with "!!!!", which cannot be reduced further.
If we first remove the group "!!!" we are left with "??????!", which cannot be reduced further.
If we are permitted to remove all odd groups of either character without reference to the effect that either has on the other, we obtain !, which cannot be reduced further.
It's not clear what rule is to be used. Here are three possibilities and code to implement each.
I will use the following two regular expressions, and in the first two cases a helper method.
Rq = /
(?<!\?) # do not match a question mark, negative lookbehind
\? # match a question mark
(\?{2})+ # match two question marks one or more times
(?!\?) # do not match a question mark, negative lookahead
/x # free-spacing regex definition mode
which is commonly written /(?<!\?)\?(\?{2})+(?!\?)/.
Similarly,
Rx = /(?<!!)!(!{2})+(?!!)/
def sequential(str, first_regex, second_regex)
s = str.dup
loop do
size = s.size
s = s.gsub(first_regex,'').gsub(second_regex,'')
return s if s.size == size
end
end
I apply each of the three methods below to two example strings:
str1 = "???!!!???!"
str2 = 50.times.map { ['?', '!'].sample }.join
#=> "?!!!?!!!?!??????!!!?!!??!!???!?!????!?!!!?!?!???!?"
Replace all odd groups of "?" then odd groups of "!" then repeat until no further removals are possible
def question_before_exclamation(str)
sequential(str, Rq, Rx)
end
question_before_exclamation str1 #=> "!!!!"
question_before_exclamation str2 #=> "??!??!?!!?!?!!?"
Replace all odd groups of "!" then odd groups of "?" then repeat until no further removals are possible
def exclamation_before_question(str)
sequential(str, Rx, Rq)
end
exclamation_before_question str1 #=> "??????!"
exclamation_before_question str2 #=> "??!????!!?!?!!?!?!!?"
Replace all odd groups of both "?" and "!" then repeat until no further removals are possible
Rqx = /#{Rq}|#{Rx}/
#=> /(?-mix:(?<!\?)\?(\?{2})+(?!\?))|(?-mix:(?<!!)!(!{2})+(?!!))/
def question_and_explanation(str)
s = str.dup
loop do
size = s.size
s = s.gsub(Rqx,'')
return s if s.size == size
end
end
question_and_explanation str1 #=> "!"
question_and_explanation str2 #=> "??!?!!?!?!!?!?!!?"
I don't know the exact Ruby syntax for this, but you could simplify your solution by using regular expressions:
Gather all matches of consecutive characters
if all matches are of even length or 1 exit
Test if matches are an odd length
if an odd length, replace with the empty string
else do nothing
Goto step 1
A solution in Perl would be:
#!perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use feature qw(say);
my $string = '!????!!!?';
sub reduce {
my ($s) = #_;
while ( my #matches = $s =~ m/((.)\2+)/g ) {
last if ! grep { length($_) > 1 && length($_) % 2 == 1 } #matches;
foreach my $match ( #matches ) {
$s =~ s/\Q$match// if length($match) > 1 && length($match) % 2 == 1;
}
}
return $s;
}
say reduce($string);
I could be wrong (this is ruby, after all) but I don't think you'll find a one-liner for this because ruby's utility functions generally aren't recursive. But you can use regex to simplify your logic, at the very least:
def remove(s)
while s =~ /(?<!\!)\!([\!]{2})+(?!\!)/ || s =~ /(?<!\?)\?([\?]{2})+(?!\?)/
s.gsub! /(?<!\!)\!([\!]{2})+(?!\!)/, "" # remove odd !
s.gsub! /(?<!\?)\?([\?]{2})+(?!\?)/, "" # remove odd ?
end
return s
end
To make the regex less mind-boggling, it helps to look at them with 'a' instead of '?' and '!':
/(?<!a)a([a]{2})+(?!a)/ #regex for 'a'
(?<!a) #negative lookbehind: the match cannot start with an 'a'
a([a]{2})+ #the match should be an 'a' followed by 1 or more pairs
(?!a) #negative lookahead: the match cannot end with an 'a'
It should be simple enough with a regular expression replacement
def remove(string)
begin
original = string
string.gsub!(/(\!{3,})|(\?{3,})/) { |s| s.length.even? ? s : '' }
end until original == string
string
end
puts remove("!????!!!?").inspect # answer == "!"
puts remove("!???!!").inspect # answer == ""
puts remove("!????!!").inspect # answer == "!????!!"
Say that we want to count the number of words in a document. I know we can do the following:
text.each_line(){ |line| totalWords = totalWords + line.split.size }
Say, that I just want to add some exceptions, such that, I don't want to count the following as words:
(1) numbers
(2) standalone letters
(3) email addresses
How can we do that?
Thanks.
You can wrap this up pretty neatly:
text.each_line do |line|
total_words += line.split.reject do |word|
word.match(/\A(\d+|\w|\S*\#\S+\.\S+)\z/)
end.length
end
Roughly speaking that defines an approximate email address.
Remember Ruby strongly encourages the use of variables with names like total_words and not totalWords.
assuming you can represent all the exceptions in a single regular expression regex_variable, you could do:
text.each_line(){ |line| totalWords = totalWords + line.split.count {|wrd| wrd !~ regex_variable }
your regular expression could look something like:
regex_variable = /\d.|^[a-z]{1}$|\A([^#\s]+)#((?:[-a-z0-9]+\.)+[a-z]{2,})\Z/i
I don't claim to be a regex expert, so you may want to double check that, particularly the email validation part
In addition to the other answers, a little gem hunting came up with this:
WordsCounted Gem
Get the following data from any string or readable file:
Word count
Unique word count
Word density
Character count
Average characters per word
A hash map of words and the number of times they occur
A hash map of words and their lengths
The longest word(s) and its length
The most occurring word(s) and its number of occurrences.
Count invividual strings for occurrences.
A flexible way to exclude words (or anything) from the count. You can pass a string, a regexp, an array, or a lambda.
Customisable criteria. Pass your own regexp rules to split strings if you prefer. The default regexp has two features:
Filters special characters but respects hyphens and apostrophes.
Plays nicely with diacritics (UTF and unicode characters): "São Paulo" is treated as ["São", "Paulo"] and not ["S", "", "o", "Paulo"].
Opens and reads files. Pass in a file path or a url instead of a string.
Have you ever started answering a question and found yourself wandering, exploring interesting, but tangential issues, or concepts you didn't fully understand? That's what happened to me here. Perhaps some of the ideas might prove useful in other settings, if not for the problem at hand.
For readability, we might define some helpers in the class String, but to avoid contamination, I'll use Refinements.
Code
module StringHelpers
refine String do
def count_words
remove_punctuation.split.count { |w|
!(w.is_number? || w.size == 1 || w.is_email_address?) }
end
def remove_punctuation
gsub(/[.!?,;:)](?:\s|$)|(?:^|\s)\(|\-|\n/,' ')
end
def is_number?
self =~ /\A-?\d+(?:\.\d+)?\z/
end
def is_email_address?
include?('#') # for testing only
end
end
end
module CountWords
using StringHelpers
def self.count_words_in_file(fname)
IO.foreach(fname).reduce(0) { |t,l| t+l.count_words }
end
end
Note that using must be in a module (possibly a class). It does not work in main, presumably because that would make the methods available in the class self.class #=> Object, which would defeat the purpose of Refinements. (Readers: please correct me if I'm wrong about the reason using must be in a module.)
Example
Let's first informally check that the helpers are working correctly:
module CheckHelpers
using StringHelpers
s = "You can reach my dog, a 10-year-old golden, at fido#dogs.org."
p s = s.remove_punctuation
#=> "You can reach my dog a 10 year old golden at fido#dogs.org."
p words = s.split
#=> ["You", "can", "reach", "my", "dog", "a", "10",
# "year", "old", "golden", "at", "fido#dogs.org."]
p '123'.is_number? #=> 0
p '-123'.is_number? #=> 0
p '1.23'.is_number? #=> 0
p '123.'.is_number? #=> nil
p "fido#dogs.org".is_email_address? #=> true
p "fido(at)dogs.org".is_email_address? #=> false
p s.count_words #=> 9 (`'a'`, `'10'` and "fido#dogs.org" excluded)
s = "My cat, who has 4 lives remaining, is at abbie(at)felines.org."
p s = s.remove_punctuation
p s.count_words
end
All looks OK. Next, put I'll put some text in a file:
FName = "pets"
text =<<_
My cat, who has 4 lives remaining, is at abbie(at)felines.org.
You can reach my dog, a 10-year-old golden, at fido#dogs.org.
_
File.write(FName, text)
#=> 125
and confirm the file contents:
File.read(FName)
#=> "My cat, who has 4 lives remaining, is at abbie(at)felines.org.\n
# You can reach my dog, a 10-year-old golden, at fido#dogs.org.\n"
Now, count the words:
CountWords.count_words_in_file(FName)
#=> 18 (9 in ech line)
Note that there is at least one problem with the removal of punctuation. It has to do with the hyphen. Any idea what that might be?
Something like...?
def is_countable(word)
return false if word.size < 2
return false if word ~= /^[0-9]+$/
return false if is_an_email_address(word) # you need a gem for this...
return true
end
wordCount = text.split().inject(0) {|count,word| count += 1 if is_countable(word) }
Or, since I am jumping to the conclusion that you can just split your entire text into an array with split(), you might need:
wordCount = 0
text.each_line do |line|
line.split.each{|word| wordCount += 1 if is_countable(word) }
end
I am trying to call the first duplicate character in my string in Ruby.
I have defined an input string using gets.
How do I call the first duplicate character in the string?
This is my code so far.
string = "#{gets}"
print string
How do I call a character from this string?
Edit 1:
This is the code I have now where my output is coming out to me No duplicates 26 times. I think my if statement is wrongly written.
string "abcade"
puts string
for i in ('a'..'z')
if string =~ /(.)\1/
puts string.chars.group_by{|c| c}.find{|el| el[1].size >1}[0]
else
puts "no duplicates"
end
end
My second puts statement works but with the for and if loops, it returns no duplicates 26 times whatever the string is.
The following returns the index of the first duplicate character:
the_string =~ /(.)\1/
Example:
'1234556' =~ /(.)\1/
=> 4
To get the duplicate character itself, use $1:
$1
=> "5"
Example usage in an if statement:
if my_string =~ /(.)\1/
# found duplicate; potentially do something with $1
else
# there is no match
end
s.chars.map { |c| [c, s.count(c)] }.drop_while{|i| i[1] <= 1}.first[0]
With the refined form from Cary Swoveland :
s.each_char.find { |c| s.count(c) > 1 }
Below method might be useful to find the first word in a string
def firstRepeatedWord(string)
h_data = Hash.new(0)
string.split(" ").each{|x| h_data[x] +=1}
h_data.key(h_data.values.max)
end
I believe the question can be interpreted in either of two ways (neither involving the first pair of adjacent characters that are the same) and offer solutions to each.
Find the first character in the string that is preceded by the same character
I don't believe we can use a regex for this (but would love to be proved wrong). I would use the method suggested in a comment by #DaveNewton:
require 'set'
def first_repeat_char(str)
str.each_char.with_object(Set.new) { |c,s| return c unless s.add?(c) }
nil
end
first_repeat_char("abcdebf") #=> b
first_repeat_char("abcdcbe") #=> c
first_repeat_char("abcdefg") #=> nil
Find the first character in the string that appears more than once
r = /
(.) # match any character in capture group #1
.* # match any character zero of more times
? # do the preceding lazily
\K # forget everything matched so far
\1 # match the contents of capture group 1
/x
"abcdebf"[r] #=> b
"abccdeb"[r] #=> b
"abcdefg"[r] #=> nil
This regex is fine, but produces the warning, "regular expression has redundant nested repeat operator '*'". You can disregard the warning or suppress it by doing something clunky, like:
r = /([^#{0.chr}]).*?\K\1/
where ([^#{0.chr}]) means "match any character other than 0.chr in capture group 1".
Note that a positive lookbehind cannot be used here, as they cannot contain variable-length matches (i.e., .*).
You could probably make your string an array and use detect. This should return the first char where the count is > 1.
string.split("").detect {|x| string.count(x) > 1}
I'll use positive lookahead with String#[] method :
"abcccddde"[/(.)(?=\1)/] #=> c
As a variant:
str = "abcdeff"
p str.chars.group_by{|c| c}.find{|el| el[1].size > 1}[0]
prints "f"
I have a string:
s="123--abc,123--abc,123--abc"
I tried using Ruby 1.9's new feature "named groups" to fetch all named group info:
/(?<number>\d*)--(?<chars>\s*)/
Is there an API like Python's findall which returns a matchdata collection? In this case I need to return two matches, because 123 and abc repeat twice. Each match data contains of detail of each named capture info so I can use m['number'] to get the match value.
Named captures are suitable only for one matching result.
Ruby's analogue of findall is String#scan. You can either use scan result as an array, or pass a block to it:
irb> s = "123--abc,123--abc,123--abc"
=> "123--abc,123--abc,123--abc"
irb> s.scan(/(\d*)--([a-z]*)/)
=> [["123", "abc"], ["123", "abc"], ["123", "abc"]]
irb> s.scan(/(\d*)--([a-z]*)/) do |number, chars|
irb* p [number,chars]
irb> end
["123", "abc"]
["123", "abc"]
["123", "abc"]
=> "123--abc,123--abc,123--abc"
Chiming in super-late, but here's a simple way of replicating String#scan but getting the matchdata instead:
matches = []
foo.scan(regex){ matches << $~ }
matches now contains the MatchData objects that correspond to scanning the string.
You can extract the used variables from the regexp using names method. So what I did is, I used regular scan method to get the matches, then zipped names and every match to create a Hash.
class String
def scan2(regexp)
names = regexp.names
scan(regexp).collect do |match|
Hash[names.zip(match)]
end
end
end
Usage:
>> "aaa http://www.google.com.tr aaa https://www.yahoo.com.tr ddd".scan2 /(?<url>(?<protocol>https?):\/\/[\S]+)/
=> [{"url"=>"http://www.google.com.tr", "protocol"=>"http"}, {"url"=>"https://www.yahoo.com.tr", "protocol"=>"https"}]
#Nakilon is correct showing scan with a regex, however you don't even need to venture into regex land if you don't want to:
s = "123--abc,123--abc,123--abc"
s.split(',')
#=> ["123--abc", "123--abc", "123--abc"]
s.split(',').inject([]) { |a,s| a << s.split('--'); a }
#=> [["123", "abc"], ["123", "abc"], ["123", "abc"]]
This returns an array of arrays, which is convenient if you have multiple occurrences and need to see/process them all.
s.split(',').inject({}) { |h,s| n,v = s.split('--'); h[n] = v; h }
#=> {"123"=>"abc"}
This returns a hash, which, because the elements have the same key, has only the unique key value. This is good when you have a bunch of duplicate keys but want the unique ones. Its downside occurs if you need the unique values associated with the keys, but that appears to be a different question.
If using ruby >=1.9 and the named captures, you could:
class String
def scan2(regexp2_str, placeholders = {})
return regexp2_str.to_re(placeholders).match(self)
end
def to_re(placeholders = {})
re2 = self.dup
separator = placeholders.delete(:SEPARATOR) || '' #Returns and removes separator if :SEPARATOR is set.
#Search for the pattern placeholders and replace them with the regex
placeholders.each do |placeholder, regex|
re2.sub!(separator + placeholder.to_s + separator, "(?<#{placeholder}>#{regex})")
end
return Regexp.new(re2, Regexp::MULTILINE) #Returns regex using named captures.
end
end
Usage (ruby >=1.9):
> "1234:Kalle".scan2("num4:name", num4:'\d{4}', name:'\w+')
=> #<MatchData "1234:Kalle" num4:"1234" name:"Kalle">
or
> re="num4:name".to_re(num4:'\d{4}', name:'\w+')
=> /(?<num4>\d{4}):(?<name>\w+)/m
> m=re.match("1234:Kalle")
=> #<MatchData "1234:Kalle" num4:"1234" name:"Kalle">
> m[:num4]
=> "1234"
> m[:name]
=> "Kalle"
Using the separator option:
> "1234:Kalle".scan2("#num4#:#name#", SEPARATOR:'#', num4:'\d{4}', name:'\w+')
=> #<MatchData "1234:Kalle" num4:"1234" name:"Kalle">
I needed something similar recently. This should work like String#scan, but return an array of MatchData objects instead.
class String
# This method will return an array of MatchData's rather than the
# array of strings returned by the vanilla `scan`.
def match_all(regex)
match_str = self
match_datas = []
while match_str.length > 0 do
md = match_str.match(regex)
break unless md
match_datas << md
match_str = md.post_match
end
return match_datas
end
end
Running your sample data in the REPL results in the following:
> "123--abc,123--abc,123--abc".match_all(/(?<number>\d*)--(?<chars>[a-z]*)/)
=> [#<MatchData "123--abc" number:"123" chars:"abc">,
#<MatchData "123--abc" number:"123" chars:"abc">,
#<MatchData "123--abc" number:"123" chars:"abc">]
You may also find my test code useful:
describe String do
describe :match_all do
it "it works like scan, but uses MatchData objects instead of arrays and strings" do
mds = "ABC-123, DEF-456, GHI-098".match_all(/(?<word>[A-Z]+)-(?<number>[0-9]+)/)
mds[0][:word].should == "ABC"
mds[0][:number].should == "123"
mds[1][:word].should == "DEF"
mds[1][:number].should == "456"
mds[2][:word].should == "GHI"
mds[2][:number].should == "098"
end
end
end
I really liked #Umut-Utkan's solution, but it didn't quite do what I wanted so I rewrote it a bit (note, the below might not be beautiful code, but it seems to work)
class String
def scan2(regexp)
names = regexp.names
captures = Hash.new
scan(regexp).collect do |match|
nzip = names.zip(match)
nzip.each do |m|
captgrp = m[0].to_sym
captures.add(captgrp, m[1])
end
end
return captures
end
end
Now, if you do
p '12f3g4g5h5h6j7j7j'.scan2(/(?<alpha>[a-zA-Z])(?<digit>[0-9])/)
You get
{:alpha=>["f", "g", "g", "h", "h", "j", "j"], :digit=>["3", "4", "5", "5", "6", "7", "7"]}
(ie. all the alpha characters found in one array, and all the digits found in another array). Depending on your purpose for scanning, this might be useful. Anyway, I love seeing examples of how easy it is to rewrite or extend core Ruby functionality with just a few lines!
A year ago I wanted regular expressions that were more easy to read and named the captures, so I made the following addition to String (should maybe not be there, but it was convenient at the time):
scan2.rb:
class String
#Works as scan but stores the result in a hash indexed by variable/constant names (regexp PLACEHOLDERS) within parantheses.
#Example: Given the (constant) strings BTF, RCVR and SNDR and the regexp /#BTF# (#RCVR#) (#SNDR#)/
#the matches will be returned in a hash like: match[:RCVR] = <the match> and match[:SNDR] = <the match>
#Note: The #STRING_VARIABLE_OR_CONST# syntax has to be used. All occurences of #STRING# will work as #{STRING}
#but is needed for the method to see the names to be used as indices.
def scan2(regexp2_str, mark='#')
regexp = regexp2_str.to_re(mark) #Evaluates the strings. Note: Must be reachable from here!
hash_indices_array = regexp2_str.scan(/\(#{mark}(.*?)#{mark}\)/).flatten #Look for string variable names within (#VAR#) or # replaced by <mark>
match_array = self.scan(regexp)
#Save matches in hash indexed by string variable names:
match_hash = Hash.new
match_array.flatten.each_with_index do |m, i|
match_hash[hash_indices_array[i].to_sym] = m
end
return match_hash
end
def to_re(mark='#')
re = /#{mark}(.*?)#{mark}/
return Regexp.new(self.gsub(re){eval $1}, Regexp::MULTILINE) #Evaluates the strings, creates RE. Note: Variables must be reachable from here!
end
end
Example usage (irb1.9):
> load 'scan2.rb'
> AREA = '\d+'
> PHONE = '\d+'
> NAME = '\w+'
> "1234-567890 Glenn".scan2('(#AREA#)-(#PHONE#) (#NAME#)')
=> {:AREA=>"1234", :PHONE=>"567890", :NAME=>"Glenn"}
Notes:
Of course it would have been more elegant to put the patterns (e.g. AREA, PHONE...) in a hash and add this hash with patterns to the arguments of scan2.
Piggybacking off of Mark Hubbart's answer, I added the following monkey-patch:
class ::Regexp
def match_all(str)
matches = []
str.scan(self) { matches << $~ }
matches
end
end
which can be used as /(?<letter>\w)/.match_all('word'), and returns:
[#<MatchData "w" letter:"w">, #<MatchData "o" letter:"o">, #<MatchData "r" letter:"r">, #<MatchData "d" letter:"d">]
This relies on, as others have said, the use of $~ in the scan block for the match data.
I like the match_all given by John, but I think it has an error.
The line:
match_datas << md
works if there are no captures () in the regex.
This code gives the whole line up to and including the pattern matched/captured by the regex. (The [0] part of MatchData) If the regex has capture (), then this result is probably not what the user (me) wants in the eventual output.
I think in the case where there are captures () in regex, the correct code should be:
match_datas << md[1]
The eventual output of match_datas will be an array of pattern capture matches starting from match_datas[0]. This is not quite what may be expected if a normal MatchData is wanted which includes a match_datas[0] value which is the whole matched substring followed by match_datas[1], match_datas[[2],.. which are the captures (if any) in the regex pattern.
Things are complex - which may be why match_all was not included in native MatchData.
I want to replace the last occurrence of a substring in Ruby. What's the easiest way?
For example, in abc123abc123, I want to replace the last abc to ABC. How do I do that?
How about
new_str = old_str.reverse.sub(pattern.reverse, replacement.reverse).reverse
For instance:
irb(main):001:0> old_str = "abc123abc123"
=> "abc123abc123"
irb(main):002:0> pattern="abc"
=> "abc"
irb(main):003:0> replacement="ABC"
=> "ABC"
irb(main):004:0> new_str = old_str.reverse.sub(pattern.reverse, replacement.reverse).reverse
=> "abc123ABC123"
"abc123abc123".gsub(/(.*(abc.*)*)(abc)(.*)/, '\1ABC\4')
#=> "abc123ABC123"
But probably there is a better way...
Edit:
...which Chris kindly provided in the comment below.
So, as * is a greedy operator, the following is enough:
"abc123abc123".gsub(/(.*)(abc)(.*)/, '\1ABC\3')
#=> "abc123ABC123"
Edit2:
There is also a solution which neatly illustrates parallel array assignment in Ruby:
*a, b = "abc123abc123".split('abc', -1)
a.join('abc')+'ABC'+b
#=> "abc123ABC123"
Since Ruby 2.0 we can use \K which removes any text matched before it from the returned match. Combine with a greedy operator and you get this:
'abc123abc123'.sub(/.*\Kabc/, 'ABC')
#=> "abc123ABC123"
This is about 1.4 times faster than using capturing groups as Hirurg103 suggested, but that speed comes at the cost of lowering readability by using a lesser-known pattern.
more info on \K: https://www.regular-expressions.info/keep.html
Here's another possible solution:
>> s = "abc123abc123"
=> "abc123abc123"
>> s[s.rindex('abc')...(s.rindex('abc') + 'abc'.length)] = "ABC"
=> "ABC"
>> s
=> "abc123ABC123"
When searching in huge streams of data, using reverse will definitively* lead to performance issues. I use string.rpartition*:
sub_or_pattern = "!"
replacement = "?"
string = "hello!hello!hello"
array_of_pieces = string.rpartition sub_or_pattern
( array_of_pieces[(array_of_pieces.find_index sub_or_pattern)] = replacement ) rescue nil
p array_of_pieces.join
# "hello!hello?hello"
The same code must work with a string with no occurrences of sub_or_pattern:
string = "hello_hello_hello"
# ...
# "hello_hello_hello"
*rpartition uses rb_str_subseq() internally. I didn't check if that function returns a copy of the string, but I think it preserves the chunk of memory used by that part of the string. reverse uses rb_enc_cr_str_copy_for_substr(), which suggests that copies are done all the time -- although maybe in the future a smarter String class may be implemented (having a flag reversed set to true, and having all of its functions operating backwards when that is set), as of now, it is inefficient.
Moreover, Regex patterns can't be simply reversed. The question only asks for replacing the last occurrence of a sub-string, so, that's OK, but readers in the need of something more robust won't benefit from the most voted answer (as of this writing)
You can achieve this with String#sub and greedy regexp .* like this:
'abc123abc123'.sub(/(.*)abc/, '\1ABC')
simple and efficient:
s = "abc123abc123abc"
p = "123"
s.slice!(s.rindex(p), p.size)
s == "abc123abcabc"
string = "abc123abc123"
pattern = /abc/
replacement = "ABC"
matches = string.scan(pattern).length
index = 0
string.gsub(pattern) do |match|
index += 1
index == matches ? replacement : match
end
#=> abc123ABC123
I've used this handy helper method quite a bit:
def gsub_last(str, source, target)
return str unless str.include?(source)
top, middle, bottom = str.rpartition(source)
"#{top}#{target}#{bottom}"
end
If you want to make it more Rails-y, extend it on the String class itself:
class String
def gsub_last(source, target)
return self unless self.include?(source)
top, middle, bottom = self.rpartition(source)
"#{top}#{target}#{bottom}"
end
end
Then you can just call it directly on any String instance, eg "fooBAR123BAR".gsub_last("BAR", "FOO") == "fooBAR123FOO"
.gsub /abc(?=[^abc]*$)/, 'ABC'
Matches a "abc" and then asserts ((?=) is positive lookahead) that no other characters up to the end of the string are "abc".