Oliver Elphick wrote:
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!
Would "^([0-9]+\\.{0,1}[0-9]*|\\.[0-9]+)$" be a little cleaner?Actually, the above could be written:
~ '^([0-9]+)|([0-9]*\\.[0-9]+)$'
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 '.'.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
