Regex: Matching by exclusion, without look-ahead - is it possible?
In some regex flavors, [negative] zero-width assertions (look-ahead/look-behind) are not supported.
This makes it extremely difficult (impossible?) to state an exclusion. For example "every line that does not have "foo" on it", like this:
^((?!foo).)*$
Can the same thing be achieved without using look-around at all (complexity and performance concerns set aside for the moment)?
UPDATE: It fails "with two ff before oo" as @Ciantic pointed out in the comments.
^(f(o[^o]|[^o])|[^f])*$
NOTE: It is much much easier just to negate a match on the client side instead of using the above regex.
The regex assumes that each line ends with a newline char if it is not then see C++'s and grep's regexs.
Sample programs in Perl, Python, C++, and grep
all give the same output.
-
perl
#!/usr/bin/perl -wn print if /^(f(o[^o]|[^o])|[^f])*$/;
-
python
#!/usr/bin/env python import fileinput, re, sys from itertools import ifilter re_not_foo = re.compile(r"^(f(o[^o]|[^o])|[^f])*$") for line in ifilter(re_not_foo.match, fileinput.input()): sys.stdout.write(line)
-
c++
#include <iostream> #include <string> #include <boost/regex.hpp> int main() { boost::regex re("^(f(o([^o]|$)|([^o]|$))|[^f])*$"); //NOTE: "|$"s are there due to `getline()` strips newline char std::string line; while (std::getline(std::cin, line)) if (boost::regex_match(line, re)) std::cout << line << std::endl; }
-
grep
$ grep "^\(f\(o\([^o]\|$\)\|\([^o]\|$\)\)\|[^f]\)*$" in.txt
Sample file:
foo
'foo'
abdfoode
abdfode
abdfde
abcde
f
fo
foo
fooo
ofooa
ofo
ofoo
Output:
abdfode
abdfde
abcde
f
fo
ofo
Came across this Question and took the fact that there wasn't a fully-working regex as a personal challenge. I believe I've managed to create a regex that does work for all inputs - provided you can use atomic grouping/possessive quantifiers.
Of course, I'm not sure if there are any flavours that allow atomic grouping but not lookaround, but the Question asked if it's possible in regex to state an exclusion without lookaround, and it is technically possible:
\A(?:$|[^f]++|f++(?:[^o]|$)|(?:f++o)*+(?:[^o]|$))*\Z
Explanation:
\A #Start of string
(?: #Non-capturing group
$ #Consume end-of-line. We're not in foo-mode.
|[^f]++ #Consume every non-'f'. We're not in foo-mode.
|f++(?:[^o]|$) #Enter foo-mode with an 'f'. Consume all 'f's, but only exit foo-mode if 'o' is not the next character. Thus, 'f' is valid but 'fo' is invalid.
|(?:f++o)*+(?:[^o]|$) #Enter foo-mode with an 'f'. Consume all 'f's, followed by a single 'o'. Repeat, since '(f+o)*' by itself cannot contain 'foo'. Only exit foo-mode if 'o' is not the next character following (f+o). Thus, 'fo' is valid but 'foo' is invalid.
)* #Repeat the non-capturing group
\Z #End of string. Note that this regex only works in flavours that can match $\Z
If, for whatever reason, you can use atomic grouping but not possessive quantifiers nor lookaround, you can use:
\A(?:$|(?>[^f]+)|(?>f+)(?:[^o]|$)|(?>(?:(?>f+)o)*)(?:[^o]|$))*\Z
As others point out, though, it's probably more practical to just negate a match through other means.