|
|
Comments and Discussions
|
|
 |

|
Thanks for sharing, my friend.
|
|
|
|

|
I read this article " ,its really amazing. I appreciate your efforts. I am student, I need help in defining the same kind of function according to my requirements. I hope, I 'll get good response.
Words are strings which are separated by dots. Two additional characters are also valid i.e:The *, which matches 1 word and the #, which matches 0..N words Example: *.stock.# matches the routing keys usd.stock and eur.stock.dsf but not stock.nasdaq.
Your help would be highly appreciated.
Sam
|
|
|
|
|

|
First of all I like this code, it is small and fully stand-alone.
I have modified it, because I need an additional wildcard joker that represents digits. Finally the modified function accepts '*', '?' and '#' as joker characters.
int wildcmp_ex(const char *wild, const char *string) {
const char *cp = NULL, *mp = NULL;
while (*string) {
if (*wild == '*') {
if (!*++wild) {
return 1;
}
mp = wild;
cp = string+1;
} else if (((*wild == *string) && (*wild != '#')) || (*wild == '?') || ((*wild == '#') && isdigit(*string))) {
wild++;
string++;
} else {
if (mp)
{
wild = mp;
string = cp++;
}
else
{
return 0;
}
}
}
while (*wild == '*') {
wild++;
}
return !*wild;
}
Thomas Haase
modified 29-Sep-11 8:26am.
|
|
|
|

|
Hi Jack Handy,
Is there a licence attached to this code?
Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|

|
Just for fun... a C# version with almost the same syntax as the original C version
public static bool wildcmp(string pattern, string text) {
var wild = new StringScanner(pattern);
var @string = new StringScanner(text);
var mp = wild;
var cp = @string;
while (@string && wild != '*') {
if (wild != @string && wild != '?') {
return false;
}
wild++;
@string++;
}
while (@string) {
if (@wild == '*') {
if (!++wild) {
return true;
}
mp = wild;
cp = @string + 1;
} else if (wild == @string || wild == '?') {
wild++;
@string++;
} else {
wild = mp;
@string = cp++;
}
}
while (wild == '*') {
wild++;
}
return !wild;
}
public struct StringScanner
{
private string _string;
private int _position;
public StringScanner(string s)
{
_string = s;
_position = 0;
}
public string String
{
get { return _string; }
}
public int Position
{
get { return _position; }
}
public bool Finished
{
get { return _position == _string.Length;}
}
public char Current
{
get { return Finished ? '\0' : _string[_position]; }
}
public bool MoveNext()
{
if (Finished)
return false;
_position++;
return true;
}
public static StringScanner operator ++(StringScanner scanner)
{
scanner.MoveNext();
return scanner;
}
public static StringScanner operator +(StringScanner scanner, int n)
{
return new StringScanner(scanner.String)
{
_position = Math.Min(scanner.Position + n, scanner.String.Length)
};
}
public static implicit operator bool(StringScanner scanner)
{
return !scanner.Finished;
}
public static implicit operator char(StringScanner scanner)
{
return scanner.Current;
}
public static bool operator ==(StringScanner scanner1, StringScanner scanner2)
{
return scanner1.Current == scanner2.Current;
}
public static bool operator !=(StringScanner scanner1, StringScanner scanner2)
{
return scanner1.Current != scanner2.Current;
}
}
|
|
|
|

|
I've been using this for years, just don't show it to your instructor.
BOOL wm(const char *s, const char *t)
{
return *t-'*' ? *s ? (*t=='?') | (toupper(*s)==toupper(*t)) && wm(s+1,t+1) : !*t : wm(s,t+1) || *s && wm(s+1,t);
}
If you want case sensitive, remove the toupper() calls.
|
|
|
|

|
This strikes me as an obvious place to use recursion. So here goes...
public class MString
{
public static bool CompareWWc(string strA, string strB, bool ignoreCase)
{
if (ignoreCase)
return CompareWWc(strA.ToLower(), strB.ToLower());
else
return CompareWWc(strA, strB);
}
public static bool CompareWWc(string strA, string strB)
{
for (int i = 0; i < strA.Length; i++)
{
if (strA[i] == '*')
{
if (i == strA.Length - 1)
return true;
strA = strA.Substring(i + 1); for (int j = i; j < strB.Length; j++)
if (CompareWWc(strA, strB.Substring(j)))
return true;
return false;
}
if (i >= strB.Length || (strA[i] != strB[i] && strA[i] != '?'))
return false;
}
return strA.Length == strB.Length;
}
}
And here's a little test sequence:
if (!MString.CompareWWc("", ""))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("something", "something"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (MString.CompareWWc("something", "zomething"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (MString.CompareWWc("something", "some"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (MString.CompareWWc("something", "something else"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("s?m?th???", "something"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (MString.CompareWWc("s?m?th???", "somethin"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("*", ""))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("*", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("non*", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("*nonsense", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("non*nse", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (MString.CompareWWc("non*nse", "nonsenze"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("non*n?e", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("n*on*nse", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("n*n*nse", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (MString.CompareWWc("*non*nse", "nonsenze"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
if (!MString.CompareWWc("n*n*n?e", "nonsense"))
Console.WriteLine("Something wrong!");
}
By the way, the name CompareWWc means Compare With Wildcards.
|
|
|
|

|
Actually, the recursive function together with substring will make this slow.
I'm using this at the moment:
public static class StringExtensions
{
public static bool WildcardMatch(this string str, string compare, bool ignoreCase)
{
if (ignoreCase)
return str.ToLower().WildcardMatch(compare.ToLower());
else
return str.WildcardMatch(compare);
}
public static bool WildcardMatch(this string str, string compare)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(compare))
return str.Length == 0;
int pS = 0;
int pW = 0;
int lS = str.Length;
int lW = compare.Length;
while (pS < lS && pW < lW && compare[pW] != '*')
{
char wild = compare[pW];
if (wild != '?' && wild != str[pS])
return false;
pW++;
pS++;
}
int pSm = 0;
int pWm = 0;
while (pS < lS && pW < lW)
{
char wild = compare[pW];
if (wild == '*')
{
pW++;
if (pW == lW)
return true;
pWm = pW;
pSm = pS + 1;
}
else if (wild == '?' || wild == str[pS])
{
pW++;
pS++;
}
else
{
pW = pWm;
pS = pSm;
pSm++;
}
}
while (pW < lW && compare[pW] == '*')
pW++;
return pW == lW && pS == lS;
}
}
|
|
|
|

|
Hi Erwin,
Thanks for your posting. It did make me decide to investigate the situation.
I still really think this is a situation that begs for recursion. But maybe you were right that substring is not a good idea. So I made this version:
public class MString2
{
public static bool CompareWWc(string strA, string strB, bool ignoreCase)
{
if (ignoreCase)
return CompareWWc(strA.ToLower(), 0, strB.ToLower(), 0);
else
return CompareWWc(strA, 0, strB, 0);
}
public static bool CompareWWc(string strA, string strB)
{
return CompareWWc(strA, 0, strB, 0);
}
private static bool CompareWWc(string strA, int indexA, string strB, int indexB)
{
for (int i = 0; indexA + i < strA.Length; i++)
{
if (strA[indexA + i] == '*')
{
if (indexA + i == strA.Length - 1)
return true;
for (int j = indexB + i; j < strB.Length; j++)
if (CompareWWc(strA, indexA + i + 1, strB, j))
return true;
return false;
}
if (indexB + i >= strB.Length || (strA[indexA + i] != strB[indexB + i] && strA[indexA + i] != '?'))
return false;
}
return strA.Length - indexA == strB.Length - indexB;
}
}
Then I ran some timing tests, using System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch. I put my test case with 19 calls to the function in a loop and executed it 10,000 times. I did this for my original version, your version, and my new version. I compiled the programs in Release mode.
Assuming I haven't made a mistake somewhere, here are my results for a single function call:
My original version: 342 nonoseconds
Your version: 237 nanoseconds
My second version: 279 nanoseconds
Now to tell you the truth, I find it very difficult to get excited about saving 100 nanoseconds at the expense of having two and a half times as many lines of code. Especially since my expected use of this function in my application will probably never exceed a couple hundred calls per day.
Anyway, thanks for getting me to think things over again and make the tests. Personally, at least in this particular case, I prefer programmer understandability to execution efficiency. I've decided to stick with my original version, since I think my second version is more difficult to understand, and the improved efficiency not worth that disadvantage.
|
|
|
|

|
Hi Erwin,
Sorry - my previous numbers are not correct. I was running the programs under the Visual Studio debugger, and that was apparently not good for timing tests.
Here's what I get now:
My original version: 243 nonoseconds
Your version: 76 nanoseconds
My second version: 111 nanoseconds
Assuming these timings are valid, your version is three times faster than my original version, and that is pretty significant, at least in a situation were the function may be used millions times a day.
Sorry for the incorrect timings in my previous posting.
|
|
|
|

|
Yes, the recursive function makes it more understandable for sure. In my case I actually call it several thousands of times after certain user actions, so I'm even considering using unsafe code I also thought of a special case where your function will get a performance hit: SearchString = "--ABC-----ABC-----ABC-----lots of text (without 'at') goes here", wildcardString = "*ABC*@". In this case my function (based on Jack's) will search for the '@' character once starting from position 5 (but won't find it, because it's not there). With your function it would search for the '@' character 3 times (once starting from position 5 until the end, once from 13 and once from 21). The longer the text at the end or the more occurances of 'ABC' at the start, the greater the performance hit.
|
|
|
|

|
If at first you don't succeed...
Here's my third version, where I say to hell with minimizing lines of code and try to optimize the speed. No "unsafe" code though, unless you consider "goto" to be unsafe coding.
public class MString
{
public static bool CompareWWc(string strA, string strB, bool ignoreCase)
{
if (ignoreCase)
return CompareWWc(strA.ToLower(), strB.ToLower());
else
return CompareWWc(strA, strB);
}
public static bool CompareWWc(string strA, string strB)
{
int starPtr = 0;
if (strB.Length >= strA.Length)
{
for (;; starPtr++)
{
if (starPtr == strA.Length)
return strA.Length == strB.Length; if (strA[starPtr] == '*')
goto firstSegmentMatches;
if (strA[starPtr] != strB[starPtr] && strA[starPtr] != '?')
return false; }
}
else
{
for (;; starPtr++)
{
if (strA[starPtr] == '*')
goto firstSegmentMatches;
if (starPtr == strB.Length)
return false; if (strA[starPtr] != strB[starPtr] && strA[starPtr] != '?')
return false; }
}
firstSegmentMatches:
int indexA; int indexB = starPtr;
while (true)
{
indexA = ++starPtr; if (indexA == strA.Length)
return true;
for (;; starPtr++)
if (starPtr == strA.Length || strA[starPtr] == '*')
break;
for (;; indexB++)
{
if (starPtr - indexA > strB.Length - indexB)
return false;
for (int i = indexA, j = indexB; i < starPtr; i++, j++)
if (strA[i] != strB[j] && strA[i] != '?')
goto tryStringBAgain;
goto findNextSegment;
tryStringBAgain:
continue;
}
findNextSegment:
indexB += starPtr - indexA; if (starPtr == strA.Length)
return indexB == strB.Length; }
}
}
And here are my timing results (which I'm not totally sure of, I'm not used to timing code):
My original version: 243 nanoseconds 17 lines of code
Erwin's version: 76 nanoseconds 42 lines of code
My second version: 111 nanoseconds 16 lines of code
My third version: 56 nanoseconds 52 lines of code
I'd appreciate it if someone would check this out and let me know if they find any bugs or anything.
|
|
|
|

|
I found small bug, if compare "*a" and "babbba" function return false.
|
|
|
|

|
Dear Jack,
Dear all,
I used this function in comparing two strings the first is Pattern(* KK *) and the second is Text(TT KK ZZ) and the function return pass. thats briliant,but my question how I can edit the function to be able to catch or handle the characters of matched * to save them in variables. for example:
X = TT
Y = ZZ
to deal with them later on in my system.
I tried many times but its not working well so far.
So please any one have an idea to do that please let me know and its will be appreciated.
Best Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Great code, but when trying this I realized that the following pattern is a match:
Search: ????????
Text to search: ABC
The problem is that the pattern can be LONGER than the text searched, in which case it should return a not found, but instead returns found.
Also, this example succeeds:
Search: y*n
Text to search: yessir
But of course should fail, since I'm looking for a text that ends with n
So I re-wrote your program to this, to correctly handle this situation.
bool StrWildCmp(char* wildstring, char *matchstring){
char stopstring[1];
*stopstring = 0;
while(*matchstring) {
if (*wildstring == '*') {
if (!*++wildstring) {
return true;
} else {
*stopstring = *wildstring;
}
}
if(*stopstring) {
if(*stopstring == *matchstring ) {
wildstring++;
matchstring++;
*stopstring = 0;
} else {
matchstring++;
}
} else if((*wildstring == *matchstring) || (*wildstring == '?')) {
wildstring++;
matchstring++;
} else {
return false;
}
if(!*matchstring && *wildstring && *wildstring != '*') {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
Thanks again for the inspiration.
|
|
|
|

|
some cases don't work properly:
wildstring = "a*bc"
matchstring = "abbc"
should be true, but it returns false
wildstring = "a*b"
matchstring = "a"
should be false, but it returns true
wildstring = "a*?b"
matchstring = "axb"
should be true, but it returns false
wildstring = "a**b"
matchstring = "axb"
should be true, but it returns false (ok, the two ** aren't useful, but they should work)
I solved the last 3 bugs, but the first one is a bit tricky...
bool StrWildCmp(char* wildstring, char *matchstring){
char stopstring[1];
*stopstring = '\0';
while(*matchstring != '\0')
{
if (*wildstring == '*')
{
do
{
wildstring++;
} while (*wildstring == '*');
if (*wildstring == '\0') {
return TRUE;
}
else
{
*stopstring = *wildstring; }
}
if(*stopstring != '\0')
{
if((*stopstring == *matchstring) || (*stopstring == '?') )
{
wildstring++;
*stopstring = '\0';
}
matchstring++;
}
else
if((*wildstring == *matchstring) || (*wildstring == '?'))
{
wildstring++;
matchstring++;
}
else
{
return FALSE;
}
if( (*matchstring == '\0') && (*wildstring != '\0') )
{
while (*wildstring == '*') wildstring++;
if (*wildstring == '\0') return TRUE;
else
return FALSE;
}
}
|
|
|
|
|

|
I recommend against PathMatchSpec(). I used that function in my own code and it just bit me. Its wildcard behavior is broken for all but the simplest cases. For example, these two commands incorrectly return false:
::PathMatchSpec("C:\\Windows", "C:\\Windows.*");
::PathMatchSpec("C:\\Windows", "C:\\Windows.");
|
|
|
|

|
Anyone tried converting this to using wchar_t* (essentially Unicode) instead of char*?
|
|
|
|

|
This is great and got my 5 because is simple, fast and useful!
Here is the wchar_t version:
int wildcmp(const wchar_t *wild, const wchar_t *string)
{
const wchar_t *cp = NULL, *mp = NULL;
while ((*string) && (*wild != L'*')) {
if ((towlower(*wild) != towlower(*string)) && (*wild != L'?')) {
return 0;
}
wild++;
string++;
}
while (*string) {
if (*wild == L'*') {
if (!*++wild) {
return 1;
}
mp = wild;
cp = string+1;
} else if ((towlower(*wild) == towlower(*string)) || (*wild == L'?')) {
wild++;
string++;
} else {
wild = mp;
string = cp++;
}
}
while (*wild == L'*') {
wild++;
}
return !*wild;
}
Example:
if (wildcmp(L"*bl?h.*", L"asblah.plm")) {
MessageBox(0,"we have a match!","wildcmp wide",MB_TOPMOST);
} else {
MessageBox(0,"no match!","wildcmp wide",MB_TOPMOST);
}
|
|
|
|

|
This is the version of the wildcmp function in XBLite programming language:
FUNCTION SBYTE wildcmp( wildcard$, search$)
' wildcmp(const char *wild, const char *string)
' Written by Jack Handy - jakkhandy@hotmail.com
ULONG cp
ULONG mp
STRING s_txt$
ULONG sp
STRING w_txt$
ULONG wp
IFZ search$ THEN RETURN $$FALSE
IFZ wildcard$ THEN RETURN $$FALSE
w_txt$ = wildcard$ + "\0\0" ' Just to be sure
s_txt$ = search$ + "\0\0"
DO WHILE (s_txt${sp}) && (w_txt${wp} != '*')
IF (w_txt${wp} != s_txt${sp} ) && (w_txt${wp} != '?') THEN RETURN $$FALSE
INC wp
INC sp
LOOP
DO WHILE (s_txt${sp})
IF ( w_txt${wp} == '*' ) THEN
INC wp
IF !(w_txt${wp}) THEN RETURN $$TRUE
mp = wp
cp = sp + 1
ELSE
IF (w_txt${wp} == s_txt${sp} ) || (w_txt${wp} == '?') THEN
INC wp
INC sp
ELSE
wp = mp
sp = cp
IF s_txt${sp} THEN INC cp
ENDIF
ENDIF
LOOP
DO WHILE (w_txt${wp} == '*' )
INC wp
LOOP
RETURN !w_txt${wp}
END FUNCTION
|
|
|
|

|
I had converted the wildcmp to C#, it's very easy to wildcard string, thanks so much.
bool WildCompare(string strWild, string strEmail)
{
int cp = 0;
int mp = 0;
int wildIndex = 0;
int emailIndex = 0;
while ((!ValueIsNullOrEmpty(strEmail, emailIndex)) && (ValueAt(strWild, wildIndex) != '*'))
{
if ((ValueAt(strWild, wildIndex) != ValueAt(strEmail, emailIndex)) && (ValueAt(strWild, wildIndex) != '?'))
{
return false;
}
wildIndex++;
emailIndex++;
}
while (!ValueIsNullOrEmpty(strEmail,emailIndex))
{
if (ValueAt( strWild, wildIndex) == '*')
{
wildIndex++;
if (ValueIsNullOrEmpty(strWild,wildIndex ))
{
return true;
}
mp = wildIndex;
cp = emailIndex + 1;
}
else if ((ValueAt(strWild, wildIndex).Equals(ValueAt(strEmail, emailIndex)) || (ValueAt(strWild, wildIndex) == '?')))
{
wildIndex++;
emailIndex++;
}
else
{
wildIndex = mp;
emailIndex = cp++;
}
}
while (ValueAt(strWild, wildIndex) == '*')
{
wildIndex++;
}
return ValueIsNullOrEmpty(strWild, wildIndex);
}
|
|
|
|

|
is it good converted?
Take SharePoint to new height
|
|
|
|

|
Well, as direct as I could come up with anyway. Makes use of unsafe to enable pointer arithmetic. Unfortunately, because fixed is required to prevent the GC from moving the pointers, I had to change it to use increment indexers instead of directly manipulating the pointers. Alternatively, you could use stackalloc to instantiate two native char[]'s and copy the values, but that seems contrary to this function's low-memory footprint, high performance goals. Has been tested against every test case presented in the comments section as well as some additional cases I threw in. public unsafe static bool GlobCompare( string glob, string path ) { fixed ( char* pGlob = glob, pPath = path ) { int pGlobInc = 0; int pPathInc = 0; int mp = 0; int cp = 0; while ( ( *( pPath + pPathInc ) != 0 ) && ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) != '*' ) ) { if ( ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) != *( pPath + pPathInc ) ) && ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) != '?' ) ) { return false; } pGlobInc++; pPathInc++; } while ( *( pPath + pPathInc ) != 0 ) { if ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) == '*' ) { if ( 0 == *( pGlob + ++pGlobInc ) ) { return true; } mp = pGlobInc; cp = pPathInc + 1; } else if ( ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) == *( pPath + pPathInc ) ) || ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) == '?' ) ) { pGlobInc++; pPathInc++; } else { pGlobInc = mp; pPathInc = cp++; } } while ( *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) == '*' ) { pGlobInc++; } return ( 0 == *( pGlob + pGlobInc ) ); } }
|
|
|
|

|
public static bool WildcardMatch(string strCompare, string strWild, bool bIgnoreCase)
{
if (bIgnoreCase)
{
strWild = strWild.ToUpper();
strCompare = strCompare.ToUpper();
}
int iWildLen = strWild.Length;
int iCompareLen = strCompare.Length;
int iWildMatched = iWildLen;
int iCompareBase = iCompareLen;
int iWild = 0;
int iCompare = 0;
while (iCompare < iCompareLen && (iWild >= iWildLen || strWild[iWild] != '*'))
{
if (iWild >= iWildLen || (strWild[iWild] != strCompare[iCompare] && strWild[iWild] != '?'))
return false;
iWild++;
iCompare++;
}
while (iCompare < iCompareLen)
{
if (iWild < iWildLen)
{
if (strWild[iWild] == '*')
{
iWild++;
if (iWild == iWildLen)
return true;
iWildMatched = iWild;
iCompareBase = iCompare + 1;
continue;
}
if (strWild[iWild] == strCompare[iCompare] || strWild[iWild] == '?')
{
iWild++;
iCompare++;
continue;
}
}
iWild = iWildMatched;
iCompare = iCompareBase++;
}
while (iWild < iWildLen && strWild[iWild] == '*')
iWild++;
if (iWild < iWildLen)
return false;
return true;
}
modified on Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
I am using this in Artistic Style, a popular multi-platform code formatter available at SourceForge.
http://astyle.sourceforge.net/
Release 1.22 added directory recursion to the project. Wildcard processing was made internal to the program. Linux has a glob function but Windows doesn't. I just used this for both of them. It let me process both platforms in a similar manner.
A minor change was made for Windows to make the comparison case insensitive. Linux was left case sensitive.
Thanks for making it available. Using this was a lot easier than writing my own. I doubt that mine would have been this sophisticated.
|
|
|
|

|
Boy do I feel stupid. I worked on an algorithm like this for days, and never got it quite right. Then, I see the wonderful, and simplistic work of someone like this, and it reminds me that sometimes we all are guilty of 'over-engineering'...
Thanks Mr. Handy!
|
|
|
|

|
How can this code be converted to do a replace? I need to provide a find/replace dialog in an application and I don't want to jump through the hoops of the Boost library. Can anyone help?
Patrick
|
|
|
|

|
Here's RegExp version (may be easily ported to C++).
Pros: More readable, Relies on proven RegExp
Cons: Maybe slower?, If eval string contains RegExp keywords then it might result in unexpected result
public static bool Match(string eval, string pattern, bool caseSensitive)
{
bool match = false;
// Make input parameters lower-case if case is not an issue
if (!caseSensitive)
{
eval = eval.ToLower();
pattern = pattern.ToLower();
}
// Escape regexp special character in pattern
pattern = pattern.Replace(".", @"\.");
// Replace valid wildcards with regexp equivalents
pattern = pattern.Replace('?', '.').Replace("*", ".*");
// Add boundaries to pattern
pattern = @"\A" + pattern + @"\z";
// Search for a match
try
{
match = Regex.IsMatch(eval, pattern);
}
catch /* (ArgumentException ex) */
{
// Syntax error in the regular expression
}
// Return result
return match;
}
|
|
|
|

|
This is tight and clever. Thanks for sharing it.
|
|
|
|

|
I agree. This is excellent.
|
|
|
|

|
Hi, wildcmp("*<*>", "<field1><field2>") return 1 while I think it should return 0 (I maybe wrong, so please tell me). If someone knows how to fix it, I will appreciate. Regards
|
|
|
|

|
Sure it matches. The first '*' matches ''. '<*>' matches ''
Regards,
Radboud
|
|
|
|

|
I think it's better to make the function return a bool value. Anyway, many string comparision functions return 0 when the strings equal.
|
|
|
|

|
if wild = "*?.abc", str = "abc.abc"
wildcmp(wild, str) not work
but if wild = "?*.abc", str = "abc.abc"
wildcmp(wild, str) do work
does anyone have any idea about the case?
|
|
|
|

|
Having similar problems with "*Hallo 200? ueberalles*.ddd".
It doesn´t work. I think, when the first * is finished, it does not expect an other wildcard in the pattern to follow.
|
|
|
|

|
Ignore my last email,
like usually the problem sits in front of the screen.
(I mixed a project built with multibyte Chars with this code which was only chars. And of course I used a Umlaut instead of 'ue' in my tests. So no wonder, why it crashed after the '?' )
I´m very sorry!
|
|
|
|

|
Simple, fast, useful, AND fun to figure out.
Well done.
|
|
|
|

|
i got the overall flow of the program I didnt get the logic of the second loop completely. I understand that in the second loop it checks if there is nothing after * if so then it is a match but if there is something it stores them in the two pointers and then goes on.
also in the final else it goes like else
{
wild = mp;
string = cp++;
}
am sorry but am not getting the logic totally.
can someone please explain?
|
|
|
|

|
In case you are matching something like the following:
"*.abc" to "ab.de.abc"
In the second loop it looks for the first character after the asterisk that is the same in the string. At first it matches "*" against "ab". mp = ".abc" during this. Now wild = ".abc" and string = ".de.abc". Obvious no match. On the next loop the first characters do match (both '.') and wild becomes "abc" and string "de.abc". The next loop there is no match and it falls to the else. Here it resets wild to the last mp (mask pattern??) and string to the last cp (character pattern) WITHOUT THE FIRST CHARACTER. (It actually advances cp one position.)
Why does it do this. After matching the * against part of the string and encountering a possible poisiton where to match the remainder of the pattern, it continued comparing characters from both to each other. This fialed. Since right before the position of mp there was a *, it is still allowed to add characters to the part that is matched against that. Basically, it goes back to that position but decides that the character that occurs in both strings is not the next character in the pattern but part of the '*' wildcard.
In the end it has matched '*' with 'ab.de'.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Hello,
i think this post is very interesting because is very simple and make very cool work !
BUT !
I don't understand why you make 3 loop to do it ?
I think i don't see all case, because for me only the 2 loop make all the work ?
I'm trying to understand all the process to add optionnal char with the ^ escape sequence, for exemple : ^-* match -12 or 12
Thanks
|
|
|
|

|
DarkYoda Mickael wrote:
I don't understand why you make 3 loop to do it ?
I think i don't see all case, because for me only the 2 loop make all the work ?
The third loop:
while (*wild == '*') {
wild++;
}
is there to take care of trailing *'s. Since * means 0 or more chars, "test*" should match "test" just fine. That loop takes care of this case.
-Jack
There are 10 types of people in this world, those that understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|

|
Hi, i have a stupid question, could someone give me the c# version
thanks in advance
|
|
|
|

|
private bool wildcmp(string wild, string str)
{
int cp=0, mp=0;
int i=0;
int j=0;
while ((i<str.Length) && (wild[j] != '*'))
{
if ((wild[j] != str[i]) && (wild[j] != '?'))
{
return false;
}
i++;
j++;
}
while (i<str.Length)
{
if (j<wild.Length && wild[j] == '*')
{
if ((j++)>=wild.Length)
{
return true;
}
mp = j;
cp = i+1;
}
else if (j<wild.Length && (wild[j] == str[i] || wild[j] == '?'))
{
j++;
i++;
}
else
{
j = mp;
i = cp++;
}
}
while (j<wild.Length && wild[j] == '*')
{
j++;
}
return j>=wild.Length;
}
This C# version works. I'm sure there are loads of improvements to be made though. Don't flame me for such bad code, I only started C# yesterday;)
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
General News Suggestion Question Bug Answer Joke Rant Admin
|
Matches a string against a wildcard string such as "*.*" or "bl?h.*" etc. This is good for file globbing or to match hostmasks.
| Type | Article |
| Licence | |
| First Posted | 1 May 2001 |
| Views | 687,063 |
| Bookmarked | 89 times |
|
|