therks Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 Shouldn't this return 1? ConsoleWrite(StringRegExp('hello', '[:alpha:]')) My AutoIt Stuff | My Github Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsaltyDS Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 Shouldn't this return 1? ConsoleWrite(StringRegExp('hello', '[:alpha:]')) Should be: ConsoleWrite(StringRegExp('hello', '[[:alpha:]]')) Valuater's AutoIt 1-2-3, Class... Is now in Session!For those who want somebody to write the script for them: RentACoder"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced." -- Geek's corollary to Clarke's law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators SmOke_N Posted October 5, 2007 Moderators Share Posted October 5, 2007 Should be: ConsoleWrite(StringRegExp('hello', '[[:alpha:]]')) YAY!! Common sense plays a role in the basics of understanding AutoIt... If you're lacking in that, do us all a favor, and step away from the computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therks Posted October 6, 2007 Author Share Posted October 6, 2007 That's it? That's been bugging me forever! That should be mentioned in the doc's cus the way it's presented in there I assumed I should just be able to go like StringRegExp('hello', '([:alpha:]+)') or whatever.Thanks!Smoke, are you YAY'ing because you couldn't get it to work either? (I'm hoping to save some of my dignity here) Or was I alone in my misunderstanding? My AutoIt Stuff | My Github Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsaltyDS Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 That's it? That's been bugging me forever! That should be mentioned in the doc's cus the way it's presented in there I assumed I should just be able to go like StringRegExp('hello', '([:alpha:]+)') or whatever. Thanks! Smoke, are you YAY'ing because you couldn't get it to work either? (I'm hoping to save some of my dignity here) Or was I alone in my misunderstanding? I wasn't clear on the rules requiring the extra square brackets. Here's one reference that kind of hints at it: Perl supports the POSIX notation for character classes. This uses names enclosed by [: and :] within the enclosing square brackets. PCRE also supports this notation. For example, [01[:alpha:]%] matches "0", "1", any alphabetic character, or "%". That kind of thing didn't really turn the light on for me, but after a lot of trial and error around it, I hit on the double brackets. AFTERWARDS, I searched for that patter and found a reference to that exact syntax: Regular Expressions - User guide (scroll down to "POSIX Character Class Definitions"): These are always used inside square brackets in the form [[:alnum:]] or combined as [[:digit:]a-d] Valuater's AutoIt 1-2-3, Class... Is now in Session!For those who want somebody to write the script for them: RentACoder"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced." -- Geek's corollary to Clarke's law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators SmOke_N Posted October 6, 2007 Moderators Share Posted October 6, 2007 Smoke, are you YAY'ing because you couldn't get it to work either? (I'm hoping to save some of my dignity here) Or was I alone in my misunderstanding?No, I knew it, I was Yaying PsaltyDS because he's repeatedly said he didn't understand RegExp's that well, and he found the solution for you. Common sense plays a role in the basics of understanding AutoIt... If you're lacking in that, do us all a favor, and step away from the computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsaltyDS Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 No, I knew it, I was Yaying PsaltyDS because he's repeatedly said he didn't understand RegExp's that well, and he found the solution for you....like when you cheer the slow kid who finally gets fractions. Valuater's AutoIt 1-2-3, Class... Is now in Session!For those who want somebody to write the script for them: RentACoder"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced." -- Geek's corollary to Clarke's law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now