On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 18:48, Josh Berkus wrote: > Theo, Oliver, > > > Any reason why you don't like ~ '^([0-9]?)+\.?[0-9]*$' ? > > Yes, because it also matches "." , which is not a valid numeric value. > > > ~ '^([0-9]+|[0-9]+\\.[0-9]*|[0-9]*\\.[0-9]+)$' > > Ah, the brute force approach ;-)
Nothing like using a nice big hammer! > Actually, the above could be written: > > ~ '^([0-9]+)|([0-9]*\\.[0-9]+)$' But that doesn't allow a trailing decimal point. > > ... though that still seems inelegant to me. Is there a regex expert in the > house? All the elegant approaches I can think of match the empty string. There must be at least one digit and 0 or 1 decimal point with no other characters permitted. If you use this as a constraint, you could make it elegant and combine it with another constraint to exclude '' and '.'. -- Oliver Elphick [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver GPG: 1024D/A54310EA 92C8 39E7 280E 3631 3F0E 1EC0 5664 7A2F A543 10EA ======================================== "Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil." Ephesians 6:11 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
