I have two arrays of strings and I want to check if a string of array a matches a string from array b. Those strings are phone numbers that might come in different formats. For example:
Array a might have a phone number with prefix like so +44123123123 or 0044123123123
Array b have a standard format without prefixes like so 123123123
So I'm looking for a regex that can match a part of a string like +44123123123 with 123123123
Btw I'm using Swift but I don't think there's a native way to do it (at least a more straightforward solution)
EDIT
I decided to reactivate the question after experimenting with the library #Larme mentioned because of inconsistent results.
I'd prefer a simper solution as I've stated earlier.
SOLUTION
Thanks guys for the responses. I saw many comments saying that Regex is not the right solution for this problem. And this is partly true. It could be true (or false) depending on my current setup/architecture ( which thinking about it now I realise that I should've explained better).
So I ended up using the native solution (hasSuffix/contains) but to do that I had to do some refactoring on the way the entire flow was structured. In the end I think it was the least complicated solution and more performant of the two. I'll give the bounty to #Alexey Inkin for being the first to mention the native solution and the right answer to #Ωmega for providing a more complete solution.
I believe regex is not the right approach for this task.
Instead, you should do something like this:
var c : [String] = b.filter ({ (short : String) -> Bool in
var result = false
for full in a {
result = result || full.hasSuffix(short)
}
return result
})
Check this demo.
...or similar solution like this:
var c : [String] = b.filter ({ (short : String) -> Bool in
for full in a {
if full.hasSuffix(short) { return true }
}
return false
})
Check this demo.
As you do not mention requirements to prefixes, the simplest solution is to check if string in a ends with a string in b. For this, take a look at https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swift/string/1541149-hassuffix
Then, if you have to check if the prefix belongs to a country, you may replace ^00 with + and then run a whitelist check against known prefixes. And the prefix itself can be obtained as a substring by cutting b's length of characters. Not really a regex's job.
I agree with Alexey Inkin that this can also nicely be solved without regex. If you really want a regex, you can try something like the following:
(?:(\+|00)(93|355|213|1684|376))?(\d+)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Add here all your expected country prefixes (see below)
^^^ ^^ Match a country prefix if it exists but don't give it a group number
^^^^^^^ Match the "prefix-prefix" (+ or 00)
^^^^ Match the local phone number
Unfortunatly with this regex, you have to provide all the expected country prefixes. But you can surely get this list online, e.g. here: https://www.countrycode.org
With this regex above you will get the local phone number in matching group 3 (and the "prefix-prefix" in group 1 and the country code in group 2).
Related
I currently have two maps: -
mapBuffer = Map[String, ListBuffer[(Int, String, Float)]
personalMapBuffer = Map[mapBuffer, String]
The idea of what I'm trying to do is create a list of something, and then allow a user to create a personalised list which includes a comment, so they'd have their own list of maps.
I am simply trying to print information as everything is good from the above.
To print the Key from mapBuffer, I use: -
mapBuffer.foreach(line => println(line._1))
This returns: -
Sample String 1
Sample String 2
To print the same thing from personalMapBuffer, I am using: -
personalMapBuffer.foreach(line => println(line._1.map(_._1)))
However, this returns: -
List(Sample String 1)
List(Sample String 2)
I obviously would like it to just return "Sample String" and remove the List() aspect. I'm assuming this has something to do with the .map function, although this was the only way I could find to access a tuple within a tuple. Is there a simple way to remove the data type? I was hoping for something simple like: -
line._1.map(_._1).removeDataType
But obviously no such pre-function exists. I'm very new to Scala so this might be something extremely simple (which I hope it is haha) or it could be a bit more complex. Any help would be great.
Thanks.
What you see if default List.toString behaviour. You build your own string with mkString operation :
val separator = ","
personalMapBuffer.foreach(line => println(line._1.map(_._1.mkString(separator))))
which will produce desired result of Sample String 1 or Sample String 1, Sample String 2 if there will be 2 strings.
Hope this helps!
I have found a way to get the result I was looking for, however I'm not sure if it's the best way.
The .map() method just returns a collection. You can see more info on that here:- https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/scala-map-method/
By using any sort of specific element finder at the end, I'm able to return only the element and not the data type. For example: -
line._1.map(_._1).head
As I was writing this Ivan Kurchenko replied above suggesting I use .mkString. This also works and looks a little bit better than .head in my mind.
line._1.map(_._1).mkString("")
Again, I'm not 100% if this is the most efficient way but if it is necessary for something, this way has worked for me for now.
I have vertex "office" and property "name" on OrientDB. I want to find the offices, by name, where the name does not have a "-" as the third character of the string. I imagine this would require some java code within the gremlin query.This is my best attempt, but it is resulting in office names that do in fact have a "-" as their third character.
g.V().hasLabel('office')
.where(values('name').map{it.get().charAt(2)}.is(neq('-')))
.project('Office Name')
.by(values('name'))
Since Gremlin doesn't support String operations (like split, charAt, etc.), your only chance is a lambda. Seems like you figured that out already, but your solution looks too overcomplicated to me. You can use something much simpler, like:
g.V().hasLabel('office').
has('name', filter {it.get()[2] != '-'}).
project('Office Name').
by('name')
However, note, that this filter will throw an exception if the office namer has less than 3 characters. Thus, you should better check that the String is long enough:
g.V().hasLabel('office').
has('name', filter {it.get().length() > 2 && it.get()[2] != '-'}).
project('Office Name').
by('name')
...or use RegEx pattern matching (which is pretty nice and easy in Groovy):
g.V().hasLabel('office').
has('name', filter {it.get() ==~ /.{2}-.*/}).
project('Office Name').
by('name')
The main reason why your traversal didn't work though, is that charAt returns a Character which is then compared to the String -, hence every office name will pass the neq filter.
How does one use Firebase to do basic auto-completion/text preview?
For example, imagine a blog backed by Firebase where the blogger can tag posts with tags. As the blogger is tagging a new post, it would be helpful if they could see all currently-existing tags that matched the first few keystrokes they've entered. So if "blog," "black," "blazing saddles," and "bulldogs" were tags, if the user types "bl" they get the first three but not "bulldogs."
My initial thought was that we could set the tag with the priority of the tag, and use startAt, such that our query would look something like:
fb.child('tags').startAt('bl').limitToFirst(5).once('value', function(snap) {
console.log(snap.val())
});
But this would also return "bulldog" as one of the results (not the end of the world, but not the best either). Using startAt('bl').endAt('bl') returns no results. Is there another way to accomplish this?
(I know that one option is that this is something we could use a search server, like ElasticSearch, for -- see https://www.firebase.com/blog/2014-01-02-queries-part-two.html -- but I'd love to keep as much in Firebase as possible.)
Edit
As Kato suggested, here's a concrete example. We have 20,000 users, with their names stored as such:
/users/$userId/name
Oftentimes, users will be looking up another user by name. As a user is looking up their buddy, we'd like a drop-down to populate a list of users whose names start with the letters that the searcher has inputted. So if I typed in "Ja" I would expect to see "Jake Heller," "jake gyllenhaal," "Jack Donaghy," etc. in the drop-down.
I know this is an old topic, but it's still relevant. Based on Neil's answer above, you more easily search doing the following:
fb.child('tags').startAt(queryString).endAt(queryString + '\uf8ff').limit(5)
See Firebase Retrieving Data.
The \uf8ff character used in the query above is a very high code point
in the Unicode range. Because it is after most regular characters in
Unicode, the query matches all values that start with queryString.
As inspired by Kato's comments -- one way to approach this problem is to set the priority to the field you want to search on for your autocomplete and use startAt(), limit(), and client-side filtering to return only the results that you want. You'll want to make sure that the priority and the search term is lower-cased, since Firebase is case-sensitive.
This is a crude example to demonstrate this using the Users example I laid out in the question:
For a search for "ja", assuming all users have their priority set to the lowercased version of the user's name:
fb.child('users').
startAt('ja'). // The user-inputted search
limitToFirst(20).
once('value', function(snap) {
for(key in snap.val()){
if(snap.val()[key].indexOf('ja') === 0) {
console.log(snap.val()[key];
}
}
});
This should only return the names that actually begin with "ja" (even if Firebase actually returns names alphabetically after "ja").
I choose to use limitToFirst(20) to keep the response size small and because, realistically, you'll never need more than 20 for the autocomplete drop-down. There are probably better ways to do the filtering, but this should at least demonstrate the concept.
Hope this helps someone! And it's quite possible the Firebase guys have a better answer.
(Note that this is very limited -- if someone searches for the last name, it won't return what they're looking for. Hence the "best" answer is probably to use a search backend with something like Kato's Flashlight.)
It strikes me that there's a much simpler and more elegant way of achieving this than client side filtering or hacking Elastic.
By converting the search key into its' Unicode value and storing that as the priority, you can search by startAt() and endAt() by incrementing the value by one.
var start = "ABA";
var pad = "AAAAAAAAAA";
start += pad.substring(0, pad.length - start.length);
var blob = new Blob([start]);
var reader = new FileReader();
reader.onload = function(e) {
var typedArray = new Uint8Array(e.target.result);
var array = Array.prototype.slice.call(typedArray);
var priority = parseInt(array.join(""));
console.log("Priority of", start, "is:", priority);
}
reader.readAsArrayBuffer(blob);
You can then limit your search priority to the key "ABB" by incrementing the last charCode by one and doing the same conversion:
var limit = String.fromCharCode(start.charCodeAt(start.length -1) +1);
limit = start.substring(0, start.length -1) +limit;
"ABA..." to "ABB..." ends up with priorities of:
Start: 65666565656565650000
End: 65666665656565650000
Simples!
Based on Jake and Matt's answer, updated version for sdk 3.1. '.limit' no longer works:
firebaseDb.ref('users')
.orderByChild('name')
.startAt(query)
.endAt(`${query}\uf8ff`)
.limitToFirst(5)
.on('child_added', (child) => {
console.log(
{
id: child.key,
name: child.val().name
}
)
})
I've research this topic extensibly and I'm asking as a last resort before assuming that there is no wildcard for what I want to do.
I need to pull up all the text input elements from the document and add it to an array. However, I only want to add the input elements that have an id.
I know you can use the \S* wildcard when using an id selector such as $(#\S*), however I can't use this because I need to filter the results by text type only as well, so I searching by attribute.
I currently have this:
values_inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^='a']");
This works how I want it to but it brings back only the text input elements that start with an 'a'. I want to get all the text input elements with an 'id' of anything.
I can't use:
values_inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^='']"); //or
values_inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^='*']"); //or
values_inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^='\\S*']"); //or
values_inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^=\\S*]");
//I either get no values returned or a syntax error for these
I guess I'm just looking for the equivalent of * in SQL for JQuery attribute selectors.
Is there no such thing, or am I just approaching this problem the wrong way?
Actually, it's quite simple:
var values_inputs = $("input[type=text][id]");
Your logic is a bit ambiguous. I believe you don't want elements with any id, but rather elements where id does not equal an empty string. Use this.
values_inputs = $("input[type='text']")
.filter(function() {
return this.id != '';
});
Try changing your selector to:
$("input[type='text'][id]")
I figured out another way to use wild cards very simply. This helped me a lot so I thought I'd share it.
You can use attribute wildcards in the selectors in the following way to emulate the use of '*'. Let's say you have dynamically generated form in which elements are created with the same naming convention except for dynamically changing digits representing the index:
id='part_x_name' //where x represents a digit
If you want to retrieve only the text input ones that have certain parts of the id name and element type you can do the following:
var inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^='part_'][id$='_name']");
and voila, it will retrieve all the text input elements that have "part_" in the beginning of the id string and "_name" at the end of the string. If you have something like
id='part_x_name_y' // again x and y representing digits
you could do:
var inputs = $("input[type='text'][id^='part_'][id*='_name_']"); //the *= operator means that it will retrieve this part of the string from anywhere where it appears in the string.
Depending on what the names of other id's are it may start to get a little trickier if other element id's have similar naming conventions in your document. You may have to get a little more creative in specifying your wildcards. In most common cases this will be enough to get what you need.
i am using whoosh to index over 200,000 books. but i have encountered some problems with it.
the whoosh query parser returns NullQuery for words like "C#", "C++" with meta-characters in them and also for some other short words. this words are used in the title and body of some documents so i am not using keyword type for them. i guess the problem is in the analysis or query-parsing phase of searching or indexing but i can't touch my data blindly. can anyone help me to correct this issue. Tnx.
i fixed the problem by creating a StandardAnalyzer with a regex pattern that meets my requirements,here is the regex pattern:
'\w+[#+.\w]*'
this will make tokenizing of fields to be done successfully, and also the searching goes well.
but when i use queries like "some query++*" or "some##*" the parsed query will be a single Every query, just the '*'. also i found that this is not related to my analyzer and this is the Whoosh's default behavior. so here is my new question: is this behavior correct or it is a bug??
note: removing the WildcardPlugin from the query-parser solves this problem but i also need the WildcardPlugin.
now i am using the following code:
from whoosh.util import rcompile
#for matching words like: '.NET', 'C++' and 'C#'
word_pattern = rcompile('(\.|[\w]+)(\.?\w+|#|\+\+)*')
#i don't need words shorter that two characters so i don't change the minsize default
analyzer = analysis.StandardAnalyzer(expression=word_pattern)
... now in my schema:
...
title = fields.TEXT(analyzer=analyzer),
...
this will solve my first problem, yes. but the main problem is in searching. i don't want to let users to search using the Every query or *. but when i parse queries like C++* i end up an Every(*) query. i know that there is some problem but i can't figure out what it is.
I had the same issue and found out that StandardAnalyzer() uses minsize=2 by default. So in your schema, you have to tell it otherwise.
schema = whoosh.fields.Schema(
name = whoosh.fields.TEXT(stored=True, analyzer=whoosh.analysis.StandardAnalyzer(minsize=1)),
# ...
)