following a RoR security tutorial (here), i wrote something along the lines of
##private_re = //
def secure?
action_name =~ ##private_re
end
the idea is that in the base case, this shouldn't match anything, and return nil. problem is that it doesn't. i've worked around for the time being by using a nonsensical string, but i'd like to know the answer.
The empty regular expression successfully matches every string.
Examples of regular expressions that will always fail to match:
/(?=a)b/
/\Zx\A/
/[^\s\S]/
It is meant to not change the behavior of the controller in any way, as // will match every string.
The idea is that ##private is meant to be set in the controller to match things you DO want to be private. Thus, that code is meant to do nothing, but when combined with
##private = /.../ in the controller, gives you a nice privacy mechanism.
Related
I just want to capture the part of the string in nbnbaasd<sd which appears before any a.
I want it to return nbnb as the match.
/.+(?!a)/.match("nbnbaasd<sd") # returns the whole string
Just use a negated character set:
/[^a]+/.match("nbnbaasd<sd")
It's far more efficient than the look-ahead method.
See it here in action: http://regexr.com?32288
It returns the whole string because indeed, "nbnbaasd<sd" is not followed by an "a".
Try this.
/.+?(?=a)/.match("nbnbaasd<sd")
(You do not actually need to use a lookahead to achieve this, but perhaps you've simplified your problem and in your real problem you do need a zero-width assertion for some reason. So this is a solution as close as possible to the one you've attempted.)
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
I want to transform the following text
This is a , here is another 
into
This is a , here is another 
In other words I want to find all the image paths that are enclosed between brackets (the text is in Markdown syntax) and replace them with other paths. The string containing the new path is returned by a separate real_path function.
I would like to do this using String#gsub in its block version. Currently my code looks like this:
re = /!\[.*?\]\((.*?)\)/
rel_content = content.gsub(re) do |path|
real_path(path)
end
The problem with this regex is that it will match  instead of just foto.jpeg. I also tried other regexen like (?>\!\[.*?\]\()(.*?)(?>\)) but to no avail.
My current workaround is to split the path and reassemble it later.
Is there a Ruby regex that matches only the path inside the brackets and not all the contextual required characters?
Post-answers update: The main problem here is that Ruby's regexen have no way to specify zero-width lookbehinds. The most generic solution is to group what the part of regexp before and the one after the real matching part, i.e. /(pre)(matching-part)(post)/, and reconstruct the full string afterwards.
In this case the solution would be
re = /(!\[.*?\]\()(.*?)(\))/
rel_content = content.gsub(re) do
$1 + real_path($2) + $3
end
A quick solution (adjust as necessary):
s = 'This is a '
s.sub!(/!(\[.*?\])\((.*?)\)/, '\1(/folder1/\2)' )
p s # This is a [foto](/folder1/foto.jpeg)
You can always do it in two steps - first extract the whole image expression out and then second replace the link:
str = "This is a , here is another "
str.gsub(/\!\[[^\]]*\]\(([^)]*)\)/) do |image|
image.gsub(/(?<=\()(.*)(?=\))/) do |link|
"/a/new/path/" + link
end
end
#=> "This is a , here is another "
I changed the first regex a bit, but you can use the same one you had before in its place. image is the image expression like , and link is just the path like foto.jpeg.
[EDIT] Clarification: Ruby does have lookbehinds (and they are used in my answer):
You can create lookbehinds with (?<=regex) for positive and (?<!regex) for negative, where regex is an arbitrary regex expression subject to the following condition. Regexp expressions in lookbehinds they have to be fixed width due to limitations on the regex implementation, which means that they can't include expressions with an unknown number of repetitions or alternations with different-width choices. If you try to do that, you'll get an error. (The restriction doesn't apply to lookaheads though).
In your case, the [foto] part has a variable width (foto can be any string) so it can't go into a lookbehind due to the above. However, lookbehind is exactly what we need since it's a zero-width match, and we take advantage of that in the second regex which only needs to worry about (fixed-length) compulsory open parentheses.
Obviously you can put real_path in from here, but I just wanted a test-able example.
I think that this approach is more flexible and more readable than reconstructing the string through the match group variables
In your block, use $1 to access the first capture group ($2 for the second and so on).
From the documentation:
In the block form, the current match string is passed in as a parameter, and variables such as $1, $2, $`, $&, and $' will be set appropriately. The value returned by the block will be substituted for the match on each call.
As a side note, some people think '\1' inappropriate for situations where an unconfirmed number of characters are matched. For example, if you want to match and modify the middle content, how can you protect the characters on both sides?
It's easy. Put a bracket around something else.
For example, I hope replace a-ruby-porgramming-book-531070.png to a-ruby-porgramming-book.png. Remove context between last "-" and last ".".
I can use /.*(-.*?)\./ match -531070. Now how should I replace it? Notice
everything else does not have a definite format.
The answer is to put brackets around something else, then protect them:
"a-ruby-porgramming-book-531070.png".sub(/(.*)(-.*?)\./, '\1.')
# => "a-ruby-porgramming-book.png"
If you want add something before matched content, you can use:
"a-ruby-porgramming-book-531070.png".sub(/(.*)(-.*?)\./, '\1-2019\2.')
# => "a-ruby-porgramming-book-2019-531070.png"
I'm having a problem getting my RegEx to work with my Ruby script.
Here is what I'm trying to match:
http://my.test.website.com/{GUID}/{GUID}/
Here is the RegEx that I've tested and should be matching the string as shown above:
/([-a-zA-Z0-9#:%_\+.~#?&\/\/=]{2,256}\.[a-z]{2,4}\b(\/[-a-zA-Z0-9#:%_\+.~#?&\/\/=]*)([\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}\/\/])*?\/)/
3 capturing groups:
group 1: ([-a-zA-Z0-9#:%_\+.~#?&\/\/=]{2,256}\.[a-z]{2,4}\b(\/[-a-zA-Z0-9#:%_\+.~#?&\/\/=]*)([\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}\/\/])*?\/)
group 2: (\/[-a-zA-Z0-9#:%_\+.~#?&\/\/=]*)
group 3: ([\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}\/\/])
Ruby is giving me an error when trying to validate a match against this regex:
empty range in char class: (My RegEx goes here) (SyntaxError)
I appreciate any thoughts or suggestions on this.
You could simplify things a bit by using URI to deal parsing the URL, \h in the regex, and scan to pull out the GUIDs:
uri = URI.parse(your_url)
path = uri.path
guids = path.scan(/\h{8}-\h{4}-\h{4}-\h{4}-\h{12}/)
If you need any of the non-path components of the URL the you can easily pull them out of uri.
You might need to tighten things up a bit depending on your data or it might be sufficient to check that guids has two elements.
You have several errors in your RegEx. I am very sleepy now, so I'll just give you a hint instead of a solution:
...[\/\/[0-9a-fA-F]....
the first [ does not belong there. Also, having \/\/ inside [] is unnecessary - you only need each character once inside []. Also,
...[-a-zA-Z0-9#:%_\+.~#?&\/\/=]{2,256}...
is greedy, and includes a period - indeed, includes all chars (AFAICS) that can come after it, effectively swallowing the whole string (when you get rid of other bugs). Consider {2,256}? instead.
I am getting completely different reults from string.scan and several regex testers...
I am just trying to grab the domain from the string, it is the last word.
The regex in question:
/([a-zA-Z0-9\-]*\.)*\w{1,4}$/
The string (1 single line, verified in Ruby's runtime btw)
str = 'Show more results from software.informer.com'
Work fine, but in ruby....
irb(main):050:0> str.scan /([a-zA-Z0-9\-]*\.)*\w{1,4}$/
=> [["informer."]]
I would think that I would get a match on software.informer.com ,which is my goal.
Your regex is correct, the result has to do with the way String#scan behaves. From the official documentation:
"If the pattern contains groups, each individual result is itself an array containing one entry per group."
Basically, if you put parentheses around the whole regex, the first element of each array in your results will be what you expect.
It does not look as if you expect more than one result (especially as the regex is anchored). In that case there is no reason to use scan.
'Show more results from software.informer.com'[ /([a-zA-Z0-9\-]*\.)*\w{1,4}$/ ]
#=> "software.informer.com"
If you do need to use scan (in which case you obviously need to remove the anchor), you can use (?:) to create non-capturing groups.
'foo.bar.baz lala software.informer.com'.scan( /(?:[a-zA-Z0-9\-]*\.)*\w{1,4}/ )
#=> ["foo.bar.baz", "lala", "software.informer.com"]
You are getting a match on software.informer.com. Check the value of $&. The return of scan is an array of the captured groups. Add capturing parentheses around the suffix, and you'll get the .com as part of the return value from scan as well.
The regex testers and Ruby are not disagreeing about the fundamental issue (the regex itself). Rather, their interfaces are differing in what they are emphasizing. When you run scan in irb, the first thing you'll see is the return value from scan (an Array of the captured subpatterns), which is not the same thing as the matched text. Regex testers are most likely oriented toward displaying the matched text.
How about doing this :
/([a-zA-Z0-9\-]*\.*\w{1,4})$/
This returns
informer.com
On your test string.
http://rubular.com/regexes/13670