re question

[Moshe Zadka]

[Posted and CCed to author. A tradition I will drop if it really annoys
anybody]

On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Tim Peters wrote:

[Max M. Stalnaker]
> I have the following code:
>
>  def subset(self):
>   group=re.search(r"%%%([^%]+)%%%",self.data)
>   self.data=group.groups(0)[0]

[the timbot]
<snipped minor improvements>
> This is much like trying to match a Python triple-quoted string with a
> regexp.  Try this:
<a complex regex which does the job>

I may be missing something obvious here, but that seems to positively
/beg/ for a minimalistic match, something like:

re.compile(r'%%%(.*?)%%%')

This will result in taking everything until the *first* %%% following our
initial %%%, which was what the poster wanted.

> Regular expressions are overkill here.  The above can be done quicker and
> easier via string.find:

I agree. And much, MUCH better if the text to be match grows to be more
then a couple of KBs, at which pcre will stumble somehow, if it all.

> regexps-are-to-html-as-regexps-are-to-raising-children-ly y'rs  - tim

At least bot children.

next-thing-bots-will-have-a-mother-in-law-ly y'rs, Z.
--
Moshe Zadka <mzadka at geocities.com>. 
INTERNET: Learn what you know.
Share what you don't.