in reply to Re: A tidier regex ?
in thread A tidier regex ?
BrowserUk, I was thinking along the same lines on the regex, but you beat me to it and you've got better regexes than what I was coming up with.
Assuming that OP is concerned about the formatting (the two underscores in the first 'word' and starting strings for the next two 'words), I think a slight modification of your second regex could work to meet that need. Something like:
m[CDC_\w+?_\w+(?:,\s+DDC(?:S|R)MR\w+){2}]
Of course, I haven't tested that, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone was able to point out problem(s) in that regex.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^3: A tidier regex ?
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 14, 2010 at 13:43 UTC |