|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Regular expression article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2|
|Regular expression has been listed as a level-5 vital article in Technology. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|Text and/or other creative content from this version of Regular expression examples was copied or moved into Regular expression with this edit on 22:28, 9 January 2012. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists.|
|WikiProject Computing / Software / CompSci||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Computer science||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Threads older than 3 months may be archived by .
Bad choice of example image/regex
The example image's regex uses lookaheads/lookbehinds without them being defined anywhere in the article!
I realise this is a result of edits to the image's original caption over time, but the image should probably be removed, or definitions added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swith22 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Typos in the formal definition, or a significant omission of English articles?
(Kleene star) R* denotes the smallest superset of set described by R that contains ε and is closed under string concatenation. This is the set of all strings that can be made by concatenating any finite number (including zero) of strings from set described by R. 11:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Since R is subject to change, the bolded material above should read
a set described by R, no?
- Please inform (and forgive) me if this usage was intentional.
- You are right, there should be an article. Since R describes exactly one set, it should even be "
the". Thanks for noticing! - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 15:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
"Regex" isn't a universally agreed on distinguishing name
The text suggests that "regular expressions" in the modern software sense aren't actual "regular expressions" in the mathematical sense (this is demonstrably true) and that they are actually "regexes". This is misleading. There are those who use the term "regex" to mean "modern software regular-expression-like engines" (this was first clearly articulated in the early 2000s as far as I know, by Larry Wall when developing Perl 6 Rules and has gained some traction). But it's trivial to find counter-examples in the literature.
Here is a researcher referring to mathematical regular expressions as "regexes":
- Yang, Yi-Hua E., and Viktor K. Prasanna. "Space-time tradeoff in regular expression matching with semi-deterministic finite automata." 2011 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM. IEEE, 2011.
And here is a Google patent that refers to software regular expressions with seemingly arbitrary alternation between the two terms:
- Chen, Jian, and Xinyu Hu. "Regular expression matching method and system." U.S. Patent No. 8,756,170. 17 Jun. 2014.
You can see that there's just no consensus in Google Scholar search (results above from page 2) and Wikipedia really should not be used to try to assert one where it does not exist...
promotional edits for the RE2 library
See the WP:MOS for guidance on ''See Also. This is a topic on regular expressions, which is not the same as a list of applications which implement regular expressions. TEDickey (talk) 11:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
The Patterns section says standard textual syntax. I know that there are definitions of regular expressions within the POSIX standard but that is for within POSIX. Where is the authority saying that the definition within the POSIX standard applies outside of POSIX? Sam Tomato (talk) 21:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)