It's as simple as that:
How can I get Browser.text.include?, or Ruby in general, to be case insensitive for that specified command?
One of the easiest ways is to downcase or upcase the text that you're reading:
Browser.text.downcase.include?
Then, you need to make sure that your desired text is supplied in all lowercase.
You can use String#match with a regular expression.
e.g.:
("CaseSensitive".match /SENSITIVE/i) != nil
That will return true if there is a case-insensitive match, false otherwise.
So for the above example, it returns true, as 'SENSITIVE' is found within 'CaseSensitive'.
For your example:
(Browser.text.match /yourString/i ) != nil
Related
The expression /^a-eg-h/.match('f') gives me nil in Ruby interpretor(2.3.1). I'm unable to figure out whats wrong.
Any suggestions ?
Ruby documentations states 'above expression should return #<MatchData "f">'.
As has been mentioned in the comments, your pattern is incorrect. It appears that you're attempting to use a character class, but have neglected to include the surrounding square brackets. Your pattern, as it currently stands, will only match on strings that start with the literal text a-eg-h. The pattern you want is:
/[^a-eg-h]/
Additionally, attempting to match the string j with this pattern will fail and return nil in Ruby, as the string does not match the pattern. A better way to go about this would be something like:
match = /[^a-eg-h]/.match(str)
if (match)
do_something()
end
I Looking for an Regex to capture this examples of strings:
first_paramenter, first_hash_key: 'class1 class2', second_hash_key: true
first_argument, single_hash_key: 'class1 class2'
first_argument_without_second_argument
The pattern rules are:
The string must start some word (the first parameter) /^(\w+)/
The second parameter is optional
If second parameter provided, must have one comma after fisrt parameter
The second argument is an hash, with keys and values. Values can be true, false or an string enclosed by quotes
The hash keys must start with letter
I'm using this regex, but it matches with the only second example:
^(\w+),(\s[a-z]{1}[a-z_]+:\s'?[\w\s]+'?,?)$
I'd go with something like:
^(\w+)(?:, ([a-z]\w+): ('[^']*')(?:, ([a-z]\w+): (\w+))?)?
Here's a Rubular example of it.
(?:...) create non-capturing groups which we can easily test for existence using ?. That makes it easy to test for optional chunks.
([a-z]\w+) is an easy way to say "it must start with a letter" while allowing normal alpha, digits and "_".
As far as testing for "Values can be true, false or an string enclosed by quotes", I'd do that in code after capturing. It's way too easy to create a complex pattern, and then be unable to maintain it later. It's better to use simple ones, then look to see whether you got what you expected, than to try to enforce it inside the regex.
in the third example, your regex return 5 matches. It would be better if return only one. It's possible?
I'm not sure what you're asking. This will return a single capture for each, but why you'd want that makes no sense to me if you're capturing parameters to send to a method:
/^(\w+(?:, [a-z]\w+: '[^']*'(?:, [a-z]\w+: \w+)?)?)/
http://rubular.com/r/GLVuSOieI6
There is frequently a choice to be made between attacking an entire string with a single regex or breaking the string up with one or more String methods, and then going after each piece separately. The latter approach often makes debugging and testing easier, and may also make the code intelligible to mere mortals. It's always a judgement call, of course, but I think this problem lends itself well to the divide and conquer approach. This is how I'd do it.
Code
def match?(str)
a = str.split(',')
return false unless a.shift.strip =~ /^\w+$/
a.each do |s|
return false unless ((key_val = s.split(':')).size == 2) &&
key_val.first.strip =~ /^[a-z]\w*$/ &&
key_val.last.strip =~ /^(\'.*?\'|true|false)$/
end
true
end
Examples
match?("first_paramenter, first_hash_key: 'class1 class2',
second_hash_key: true")
#=>true
match?("first_argument, single_hash_key: 'class1 class2'")
#=>true
match?("first_argument_without_second_argument")
#=>true
match?("first_parameter, first_hash_key: 7")
#=>false
match?("dogs and cats, first_hash_key: 'class1 class2'")
#=>false
match?("first_paramenter, first_hash_key: 'class1 class2',
second_hash_key: :true")
#=>false
You've got the basic idea, you have a bunch of small mistakes in there
/^(\w+)(,\s[a-z][a-z_]+:\s('[^']*'|true|false))*$/
explained:
/^(\w+) # starts with a word
(
,\s # the comma goes _inside_ the parens since its optional
[a-z][a-z_]+:\s # {1} is completely redundant
( # use | in a capture group to allow different possible keys
'[^']*' | # note that '? doesn't make sure that the quotes always match
true |
false
)
)*$/x # can have 0 or more hash keys after the first word
I want to create a simple function in Ruby that will check if the given string contains any unicode characters in the ranges such as the following:
U+007B -- U+00BF
U+02B0 -- U+037F
U+2000 -- U+2BFF
How can I accomplish this? Google is coming up blank for me, all things about removing unicode characters or checking if a string contains unicode.
The easiest thing would probably be a regex using String#index, String#match, or even String#[]:
string.index(/[\u007B-\u00BF\u02B0-\u037F\u2000-\u2BFF]/)
string.match(/[\u007B-\u00BF\u02B0-\u037F\u2000-\u2BFF]/)
string[/[\u007B-\u00BF\u02B0-\u037F\u2000-\u2BFF]/]
All three will give you nil (which is falsey) if they don't find the pattern and non-nil (which will be truthy) if they do.
I would do as below:
my_string = "{ How are you ?}"
puts my_string.chars.any? { |chr| ("\u007B".."\u00BF").include?(chr) }
#=> true
How would I go about testing for an exact match using regex.
"car".match(/[ca]+/) returns true.
How would I get the above statement to return false since the regex pattern doesn't contain an "r"? Any string that contains any characters other than "c" and "a" should return false.
"acacaccc" should return true
"acacacxcc" should return false
Add some anchors to it:
/^[ca]+$/
You just need anchors.
"car".match(/^[ca]+$/)
This'll force the entire string to be composed of "c" or "a", since the "^" and "$" mean "start" and "end" of the string. Without them, the regex will succeed as long as it matches any portion of the string.
Turn your logic around and look for bad things:
string.match(/[^ca]/)
string.index(/[^ca]/)
If either of the above are non-nil, then you have a bad string. If you just want to test and don't care about where it matches then:
if string.index(/[^ca]/).nil?
# You have a good string
else
# You have a bad string
For example:
>> "car".index(/[^ca]/).nil?
=> false
>> "caaaacaac".index(/[^ca]/).nil?
=> true
try this
"car".match /^(a|c)+$/
Try this:
"car".match(/^(?:c|a)$/)
In Ruby, what regex will strip out all but a desired string if present in the containing string? I know about /[^abc]/ for characters, but what about strings?
Say I have the string "group=4&type_ids[]=2&type_ids[]=7&saved=1" and want to retain the pattern group=\d, if it is present in the string using only a regex?
Currently, I am splitting on & and then doing a select with matching condition =~ /group=\d/ on the resulting enumerable collection. It works fine, but I'd like to know the regex to do this more directly.
Simply:
part = str[/group=\d+/]
If you want only the numbers, then:
group_str = str[/group=(\d+)/,1]
If you want only the numbers as an integer, then:
group_num = str[/group=(\d+)/,1].to_i
Warning: String#[] will return nil if no match occurs, and blindly calling nil.to_i always returns 0.
You can try:
$str =~ s/.*(group=\d+).*/\1/;
Typically I wouldn't really worry too much about a complex regex. Simply break the string down into smaller parts and it becomes easier:
asdf = "group=4&type_ids[]=2&type_ids[]=7&saved=1"
asdf.split('&').select{ |q| q['group'] } # => ["group=4"]
Otherwise, you can use regex a bunch of different ways. Here's two ways I tend to use:
asdf.scan(/group=\d+/) # => ["group=4"]
asdf[/(group=\d+)/, 1] # => "group=4"
Try:
str.match(/group=\d+/)[0]