Jump to content

Talk:Regular expression

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Caleb Stanford (talk | contribs) at 02:18, 12 June 2022 (rate importance=top). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

WikiProject iconComputing: Software / CompSci B‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as High-importance).
Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

WikiProject iconComputer science B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Not operator !

There is no discussion here of the 'not' operator. It is fleetingly shown in the mention of assertions. I would expect it to be in the metacharacter list as well. Neils51 (talk) 01:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of the word Regex

I think it's worth touching on the pronunciation of the word, as it seems that that some people pronounce it "redge-ex" and others pronounce it "regg-ex". The former seems to be linguistically more natural since there is no glottal stop in the middle of the word, and seems to be used more commonly, however some sources suggest it is pronounced the way indicated in the latter example.

Thoughts? Nabeel_co (talk) 05:15, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think there are many such technical constructed words where pronunciations vary, and I don't think we need to cover that. Unless there's a good source (preferably even one discussing the pronunciation rather than merely stating an opinion on it), I don't think we can cover that.-- (talk) 09:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
most people I know pronounce it "redge-ex" OsamaBinLogin (talk) 06:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
there's no definitive answer and no practical way of getting a majority opinion, so best not mentioned. (I and most people I know use "reggex", the logic is that it's the first two syllables from "regular expression") — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhkay (talkcontribs) 10:53, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

find and replace redirects here

Find and replace is a related, but quite different, concept. It should be a separate article, discussing the usage of find and replace in UIs and text editors. Caleb Stanford (talk) 00:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, Find and replace was turned into a redirect to Regular expression in 2012, following a regular discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Find and replace. The last version before it was turned into a redirect is here. —Tea2min (talk) 07:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, quite a lot I think, Find and replace is now (since sometime in March 2022) a disambiguation page. I was unfortunate to read the linked Afd page and was wondering at the sheer _stupidity_ expressed there, before I found out that brighter minds had already fixed the problem (if only fairly recently.) No, I can't be bothered to log in, already wasted enough time on WP today. 5.186.55.135 (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

infinite number of equivalent regexes

The text states, without citation: "In most formalisms, if there exists at least one regular expression that matches a particular set then there exists an infinite number of other regular expressions that also match it—the specification is not unique." Well yes, X|X matches the same set of strings as X, as does X|X|X etc. But is this worth saying, does it matter, and if it is worth saying, shouldn't there be a citation? 82.152.109.221 (talk) 10:35, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed this is a bit weird. I edited to clarify the offending sentence. I don't think it needs an inline citation as it is pretty self-evident. Caleb Stanford (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]