using Expect how can I check whether the given input has at least one upper case,at least one lowercase and at least one number or "!-%#"? For a similar question where the min number of input string is 10, someone answered
使用Expect，我如何检查给定输入是否有至少一个大小写和至少一个数字或“!-%#”?对于输入字符串的最小数目为10的类似问题，有人回答
expect ^(?=.*?[A-Z])(?=.*?[a-z])(?=.*?[0-9])([!-%#])*.{10,}$
As I'm new to Tcl and Expect, can anyone please explain how the above code works? Why is it not working if we remove {10,} in order to remove the minimum limit?
由于我是Tcl的新手，希望有人能解释一下上面的代码是如何工作的?如果我们删除{10，}以删除最小限制，为什么它不工作?
1 个解决方案
#1
2
The min limit cannot be removed by deleting the limiting (bound) quantifier {10,}, you need to replace it with * (to allow empty string) or + (to require at least 1):
通过删除限制(绑定)量词{10，}不能删除最小限制，您需要用*(允许空字符串)或+(至少需要1)替换它:
expect ^(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-]).*$
or just (since expect does not require a full string match):
或者仅仅(因为expect不需要完整的字符串匹配):
expect ^(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])
If you need to restrict the symbols to those inside the lookaheads, just replace .* with [a-zA-Z0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*:
如果你需要限制符号在超前,只是取代。*与[a-zA-Z0-9 # ? ! @ $ % ^ & *()*:
expect ^(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])[a-zA-Z0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*$
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'd also use greedy quantifiers in a consistent manner in a Tcl regex, although that makes no difference in the current pattern.
我还将在Tcl regex中以一致的方式使用贪婪量词，尽管这在当前模式中没有区别。
Details:
细节:
-
^- start of string - ^ -字符串的开始
-
(?=.*[A-Z])- after any 0+ chars there must be an uppercase ASCII letter - (?=.*[A-Z]) -在任何0+字符之后，必须有一个大写的ASCII字符
-
(?=.*[a-z])- after any 0+ chars there must be an lowercase ASCII letter - (?=.*[a-z]) -在任何0+字符之后，必须有一个小写的ASCII字母
-
(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])- after any 0+ chars there must be an ASCII digit, or any of the special symbols defined in the character class - (? =。*[0 - 9 # ? ! @ $ % ^ & *())——在任何0 +字符必须有一个ASCII数字,或任何特殊字符类中定义的符号
-
.*- any 0+ characters, as many as possible up to - .* -任何0+字符，最多
-
$- the end of string. - $ -字符串的末尾。
The (?=...) constructs are called positive lookaheads that "stand their ground", i.e. do not advance the regex index once they are executed. Thus, the 3 lookaheads will perform the check one by one, and once one of them returns false, the whole match will be failed.
(?=…)构造被称为“站在他们的立场上”的积极的lookahead，也就是说，一旦它们被执行，就不要推进regex索引。因此，3个lookaheads将逐个执行检查，一旦其中一个返回false，整个匹配将失败。
Note: to avoid unnecessary backtracking with .*, you may apply the principle of contrast (i.e. using corresponding negated character classes inside the lookaheads):
注意:为了避免不必要的回溯，*，你可以应用对比原则(即使用相应的否定字符类在lookaheads内):
^(?=[^A-Z]*[A-Z])(?=[^a-z]*[a-z])(?=[^0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])[a-zA-Z0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*$
The [^A-Z]* will match one or more characters other than uppercase ASCII letters, [^a-z]*will match one or more characters other than lowercase ASCII letters, etc. The .* grabs the whole string first, and then backtracks, checking if the subsequent subpattern can match. So, negated character classes are much more efficient and find or fail the match quicker.
^[a - z]*将匹配一个或多个字符以外的ASCII字母,大写^[a - z]*将匹配一个或多个字符小写ASCII字母以外,等。*抓住整个字符串的第一个,然后放弃,检查如果后续子模式匹配。因此，否定字符类的效率要高得多，可以更快地找到或失败匹配。
#1
2
The min limit cannot be removed by deleting the limiting (bound) quantifier {10,}, you need to replace it with * (to allow empty string) or + (to require at least 1):
通过删除限制(绑定)量词{10，}不能删除最小限制，您需要用*(允许空字符串)或+(至少需要1)替换它:
expect ^(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-]).*$
or just (since expect does not require a full string match):
或者仅仅(因为expect不需要完整的字符串匹配):
expect ^(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])
If you need to restrict the symbols to those inside the lookaheads, just replace .* with [a-zA-Z0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*:
如果你需要限制符号在超前,只是取代。*与[a-zA-Z0-9 # ? ! @ $ % ^ & *()*:
expect ^(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])[a-zA-Z0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*$
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'd also use greedy quantifiers in a consistent manner in a Tcl regex, although that makes no difference in the current pattern.
我还将在Tcl regex中以一致的方式使用贪婪量词，尽管这在当前模式中没有区别。
Details:
细节:
-
^- start of string - ^ -字符串的开始
-
(?=.*[A-Z])- after any 0+ chars there must be an uppercase ASCII letter - (?=.*[A-Z]) -在任何0+字符之后，必须有一个大写的ASCII字符
-
(?=.*[a-z])- after any 0+ chars there must be an lowercase ASCII letter - (?=.*[a-z]) -在任何0+字符之后，必须有一个小写的ASCII字母
-
(?=.*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])- after any 0+ chars there must be an ASCII digit, or any of the special symbols defined in the character class - (? =。*[0 - 9 # ? ! @ $ % ^ & *())——在任何0 +字符必须有一个ASCII数字,或任何特殊字符类中定义的符号
-
.*- any 0+ characters, as many as possible up to - .* -任何0+字符，最多
-
$- the end of string. - $ -字符串的末尾。
The (?=...) constructs are called positive lookaheads that "stand their ground", i.e. do not advance the regex index once they are executed. Thus, the 3 lookaheads will perform the check one by one, and once one of them returns false, the whole match will be failed.
(?=…)构造被称为“站在他们的立场上”的积极的lookahead，也就是说，一旦它们被执行，就不要推进regex索引。因此，3个lookaheads将逐个执行检查，一旦其中一个返回false，整个匹配将失败。
Note: to avoid unnecessary backtracking with .*, you may apply the principle of contrast (i.e. using corresponding negated character classes inside the lookaheads):
注意:为了避免不必要的回溯，*，你可以应用对比原则(即使用相应的否定字符类在lookaheads内):
^(?=[^A-Z]*[A-Z])(?=[^a-z]*[a-z])(?=[^0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*[0-9#?!@$%^&*-])[a-zA-Z0-9#?!@$%^&*-]*$
The [^A-Z]* will match one or more characters other than uppercase ASCII letters, [^a-z]*will match one or more characters other than lowercase ASCII letters, etc. The .* grabs the whole string first, and then backtracks, checking if the subsequent subpattern can match. So, negated character classes are much more efficient and find or fail the match quicker.
^[a - z]*将匹配一个或多个字符以外的ASCII字母,大写^[a - z]*将匹配一个或多个字符小写ASCII字母以外,等。*抓住整个字符串的第一个,然后放弃,检查如果后续子模式匹配。因此，否定字符类的效率要高得多，可以更快地找到或失败匹配。