I'm processing a bunch of tables using this program, but I need to ignore ones that start with the label "tbd_".
So far I have something like [^tbd_], but that simply not match those characters.
-
How does SchemaSpy work? Are you passing it a list of table names or are you passing it a regex and it's doing the matching?Mark Biek– Mark Biek2009-05-22 18:57:29 +00:00Commented May 22, 2009 at 18:57
-
I'm passing a regex (it's the -i flag) and it'll import the matches, or so it says in any case =)echoblaze– echoblaze2009-05-22 19:10:24 +00:00Commented May 22, 2009 at 19:10
-
6@echoblaze: If you’re processing XML, why don’t you use an XML parser? That would be much easier than using regular expressions.Gumbo– Gumbo2009-05-22 19:25:53 +00:00Commented May 22, 2009 at 19:25
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
You could use a negative look-ahead assertion:
^(?!tbd_).+
Or a negative look-behind assertion:
(^.{1,3}$|^.{4}(?<!tbd_).*)
Or just plain old character sets and alternations:
^([^t]|t($|[^b]|b($|[^d]|d($|[^_])))).*
14 Comments
Mark Biek
Is this restricted to any particular regex engines?
Mark Biek
I only ask because that second one still seems to match tbd_ in my test. The first one is great though.
Gumbo
Take a look at regular-expressions.info’s flavor comparison: regular-expressions.info/refflavors.html
BenAlabaster
@Gumbo - should that not end .* instead of .+? A string that is tbd_ also starts with that... therefore by definition doesn't need to be followed by any other characters? Otherwise, good example. It does require a regex engine that supports lookaround though.
Gumbo
@balabaster: I don’t think he’s looking for empty strings. But if so, he can easily change that by replacing the
.+ by .* |
