|
Roman Olney wrote: i want it to be more sophisticated than that.
Really? Try researching the KISS Principle and Rube Goldberg.
Hint: Both have pages on Wikipedia
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
I need to be able to parse the following line, I am not even sure regualar expression are
the best option.
LIC#:ABC123 YRMD:03 MAKE:CHEV BTM :CP VIN :1G1JC12F137230800
into
LIC#:ABC123
YRMD:03
MAKE:CHEV
BTM :CP
VIN :1F1JD12F137230735
And then capture the data after the semicolon.
All can be variable length and there isn't a delimiter
Unfortunately, you also can't depend on the tags having no spaces with the colons (i.e. VIN :, vs YRMD:.
I have been trying to use Grouping to parse this.
I am newish to regular expression and thought maybe I should use them to solve this problem.
Are regular expression even a good fit for this problem?
Any suggestions appreciated.
modified on Friday, March 21, 2008 12:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
You don't parse with regular expressions.
Try something like this:
private string SplitValue(string str, char delim)
{
string[] parts = str.Split(delim);
return parts[1];
}
private bool Test7()
{
bool result = false;
string original = "LIC#:ABC123 YRMD:03 MAKE:CHEV BTM :CP VIN :1G1JC12F137230800";
string[] parts = original.Split(' ');
if (parts.Length != 7)
{
return result;
}
string license = SplitValue(parts[0], ':');
string yrmd = SplitValue(parts[1], ':');
string make = SplitValue(parts[2], ':'); ;
string btm = parts[4].Replace(":", "");
string vin = parts[6].Replace(":", "");
return true;
}
The code above is based on the string you provided. Since there appear to be spaces in places where there really should be none, you can't really get away with a single split command, so you have to improvise. Yeah, I could have used substring instead of writing another function to split the first three parts, but what the hell, I had time...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, I would taken a much more difficult approach.
That is embarrassingly simple.
|
|
|
|
|
smesser wrote: Unfortunately, you also can't depend on the tags having no spaces with the colons (i.e. VIN :, vs YRMD:.
Perhaps you could replace " :" with ":" to fix that and make processing easier.
After that, if values don't contain SPACEs then you can split on SPACE and then on colon as mentioned.
Certainly a Regular Expression could be used if the data is regular enough, but why not perform both tasks at once?
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I had just tried that myself.
That one was looking me right in the face.
|
|
|
|
|
smesser wrote:
All can be variable length and there isn't a delimiter
Unfortunately, you also can't depend on the tags having no spaces with the colons (i.e. VIN :, vs YRMD:.
This is true, which makes parsing strings like that pretty hard. I did however find a pattern in this string, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it holds true for other strings.
Basically it's always a pair of arbitrary strings separated by a colon, sort of like a key/value-pair.
So whenever there's a whitespace left (or also right?) to the colon it doesn't count as a delimiter.
Based on this fact the following regex will work:
[^\ ]+\ *:[^\ ]+
If you want to also disallow whitespaces right to the colon as a delimiter then this will work:
[^\ ]+\ *:\ *[^\ ]+
regards
modified 12-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Then what use named groups to get your values?
EDIT:
private void Test9()
{
string original = "LIC#:ABC123 YRMD:03 MAKE:CHEV BTM :CP VIN :1G1JC12F137230800";
Regex r = new Regex(@"[^\ ]+\ *:\ *[^\ ]+");
MatchCollection theMatches = r.Matches(original);
foreach (Match theMatch in theMatches)
{
Console.WriteLine(theMatch.Value);
}
}
modified on Friday, March 21, 2008 12:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
This seems to work
if ( args.Length > 0 )
{
System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex reg = new System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex
(
@"^\s*LIC#\s*: (?'LIC'.*)YRMD\s*: (?'YRMD'.*)MAKE\s*: (?'MAKE'.*)BTM\s*: (?'BTM'.*)VIN\s: (?'VIN'.*)$"
) ;
foreach ( System.Text.RegularExpressions.Match mat in reg.Matches ( args [ 0 ] ) )
{
System.Console.WriteLine
(
"LIC# = {0} YRMD = {1} MAKE = {2} BTM = {3} VIN = {4}"
,
mat.Groups [ "LIC" ].Value
,
mat.Groups [ "YRMD" ].Value
,
mat.Groups [ "MAKE" ].Value
,
mat.Groups [ "BTM" ].Value
,
mat.Groups [ "VIN" ].Value
) ;
}
}
Dagnabit! Frowny faces?! Who wrote this crap?
I added a SPACE between the : and the ( to solve that little problem, but they should be eliminated from the Regex.
modified on Friday, March 21, 2008 1:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: Dagnabit! Frowny faces?! Who wrote this crap?
Paging Chris Maunder. 
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop.
-- Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
Hum, unless the copy paste messed something up this is not creating a match for me.
|
|
|
|
|
With the SPACE between the : and ( you need to use
System.Text.RegularExpressions.RegexOptions.IgnorePatternWhitespace
to ignore the extraneous SPACEs, but then the # and everything after it become a comment! 
So now I've escaped the the # to \x23.
Resulting in:
System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex reg = new System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex
(
@"^\s*LIC\x23\s*: (?'LIC'.*)YRMD\s*: (?'YRMD'.*)MAKE\s*: (?'MAKE'.*)BTM\s*: (?'BTM'.*)VIN\s: (?'VIN'.*)$"
,
System.Text.RegularExpressions.RegexOptions.IgnorePatternWhitespace
) ;
Whoops, I had left out an asterisk I had meant to include: VIN\s*
modified on Friday, March 21, 2008 2:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Quick little edit to get rid of the extra space that was being captured.
^\s*LIC\x23\s*: (?'LIC'.*)\sYRMD\s*: (?'YRMD'.*)\sMAKE\s*: (?'MAKE'.*)\sBTM\s*: (?'BTM'.*)\sVIN\s: (?'VIN'.*)$
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, I was leaving that for the OP to do; I didn't want to solve the whole thing for him. 
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I was bored and happened to have The Regulator open. At least now I can enjoy the weekend in knowing that I accomplished something today. 
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks all, your comments and examples have been very inlightening
modified on Friday, March 21, 2008 6:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I was just wondering about the following problem. I often write device drivers for various hardware systems. Often I put all that code in a DLL which can be called by another program. Usually I'll need to put in a form somewhere to allow the user to change parameters and settings. Normally this form is in the program that accesses the dll which is all well and good.
Thats all fine, but I got to wondering does anyone know how to put a windows form with buttons and stuff inside a dll? Could I use the forms editor like I would If I was producing an exe or would I have to hard code everything?
Its just that I figured it would lead to a much more modular and potentially better design because all the configuration and control is in one place.
|
|
|
|
|
Just create a C# Class Project and create your forms there, as per normal.
|
|
|
|
|
That was quick! So literally it is just as simple as the process for writing a new exe file then. Thanks I'll have to try it.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks I tried it and it works just fine.
I needed to simply add a form to the dll class and add a method inside the dll that shows the form. Another program can simply call the method inside the dll to display to form. - Thats just great.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been rummaging around in nUnit and experimenting with it, and I have a question about properly using it.
It seems to me that it's only real purpose is to test discrete functions and classes, and really isn't applicable for testing the application that uses the "units". Am I just missing something?
Next, I understand that TDD is supposed to promote the building of tests before doing the actual coding, but what about adding nUnit to existing code? It seems kinda pointless unless you're doing a ground-up redesign of your code.
I've been a programmer for almost 30 years, and didn't really understand the reasoning behind "extreme programming", and think "agile programming" is the sure path to failure in a production product. TDD makes a lot more sense in theory because you have to have a good design up front in order to write applicable/viable tests, which leads (theoretically) to better core code sooner in the process.
Please be gentle in your protestations and guidance - remember, I'm REALLY new at this TDD stuff.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Hi John,
first of all, wrong forum. Your message does not contain a single C# item
I have been using nunit occasionally, and yes I too think it is more suited for
testing the lower levels of a program, a library, the business logic, etc;
and less for a GUI, or an entire app.
That does not change the value of TDD though, it only tells me we may need or want
other tools as well.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: first of all, wrong forum. Your message does not contain a single C# item
I knew I shoulda brought a gun to this party...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: and didn't really understand the reasoning behind "extreme programming", and think "agile programming"
AFAIK, these are successful when you are doing an application which don't have a proper requirement specification in hand. If you have the complete requirement and design document with you, then these are kinda pointless. Concept is, when new changes are made to the system, automated tests will ensure everything else is functioning correctly.
I tried this approach and liked it very much. The project which I worked don't have complete requirements when I started it. So I created test cases for the functionalities which I wrote. When I get new requirements, I were able to make changes without looking to the other parts of code, automated tests will fail if the new change is affecting somewhere.
Hope this makes sense
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
