We Keep Coding

Regex IsMatch aways returns false [duplicate]

I have a regex
/^([a-zA-Z0-9]+)$/
this just allows only alphanumerics but also if I insert only number(s) or only character(s) then also it accepts it. I want it to work like the field should accept only alphanumeric values but the value must contain at least both 1 character and 1 number.

Why not first apply the whole test, and then add individual tests for characters and numbers? Anyway, if you want to do it all in one regexp, use positive lookahead:
/^(?=.*[0-9])(?=.*[a-zA-Z])([a-zA-Z0-9]+)$/

This RE will do:
/^(?:[0-9]+[a-z]|[a-z]+[0-9])[a-z0-9]*$/i
Explanation of RE:
Match either of the following:
At least one number, then one letter or
At least one letter, then one number plus
Any remaining numbers and letters
(?:...) creates an unreferenced group
/i is the ignore-case flag, so that a-z == a-zA-Z.

I can see that other responders have given you a complete solution. Problem with regexes is that they can be difficult to maintain/understand.
An easier solution would be to retain your existing regex, then create two new regexes to test for your "at least one alphabetic" and "at least one numeric".
So, test for this :-
/^([a-zA-Z0-9]+)$/
Then this :-
/\d/
Then this :-
/[A-Z]/i
If your string passes all three regexes, you have the answer you need.

The accepted answers is not worked as it is not allow to enter special characters.
Its worked perfect for me.
^(?=.*[0-9])(?=.*[a-zA-Z])(?=\S+$).{6,20}$
one digit must
one character must (lower or upper)
every other things optional
Thank you.

While the accepted answer is correct, I find this regex a lot easier to read:
REGEX = "([A-Za-z]+[0-9]|[0-9]+[A-Za-z])[A-Za-z0-9]*"

This solution accepts at least 1 number and at least 1 character:
[^\w\d]*(([0-9]+.*[A-Za-z]+.*)|[A-Za-z]+.*([0-9]+.*))

And an idea with a negative check.
/^(?!\d*$|[a-z]*$)[a-z\d]+$/i
^(?! at start look ahead if string does not
\d*$ contain only digits | or
[a-z]*$ contain only letters
[a-z\d]+$ matches one or more letters or digits until $ end.
Have a look at this regex101 demo
(the i flag turns on caseless matching: a-z matches a-zA-Z)

Maybe a bit late, but this is my RE:
/^(\w*(\d+[a-zA-Z]|[a-zA-Z]+\d)\w*)+$/
Explanation:
\w* -> 0 or more alphanumeric digits, at the beginning
\d+[a-zA-Z]|[a-zA-Z]+\d -> a digit + a letter OR a letter + a digit
\w* -> 0 or more alphanumeric digits, again
I hope it was understandable

What about simply:
/[0-9][a-zA-Z]|[a-zA-Z][0-9]/
Worked like a charm for me...
Edit following comments:
Well, some shortsighting of my own late at night: apologies for the inconvenience...
The - incomplete - underlying idea was that only one "transition" from a digit to an alpha or from an alpha to a digit was needed somewhere to answer the question.
But next regex should do the job for a string only comprised of alphanumeric characters:
/^[0-9a-zA-Z]*([0-9][a-zA-Z]|[a-zA-Z][0-9])[0-9a-zA-Z]*$/
which in Javascript can be furthermore simplified as:
/^[0-9a-z]*([0-9][a-z]|[a-z][0-9])[0-9a-z]*$/i
In IMHO it's more straigthforward to read and understand than some other answers (no backtraking and the like).
Hope this helps.

If you need the digit to be at the end of any word, this worked for me:
/\b([a-zA-Z]+[0-9]+)\b/g
\b word boundary
[a-zA-Z] any letter
[0-9] any number
"+" unlimited search (show all results)

C# Regex Validation

Can someone please validate this for me (newbie of regex match cons).
Rather than asking the question, I am writing this:
Regex rgx = new Regex (#"^{3}[a-zA-Z0-9](\d{5})|{3}[a-zA-Z0-9](\d{9})$"
Can someone telll me if it's OK...
The accounts I am trying to match are either of:
1. BAA89345 (8 chars)
2. 12345678 (8 chars)
3. 123456789112 (12 chars)
Thanks in advance.

You can use a Regex tester. Plenty of free ones online. My Regex Tester is my current favorite.

Is the value with 3 characters then followed by digits always starting with three... can it start with less than or more than three. What are these mins and max chars prior to the digits if they can be.

You need to place your quantifiers after the characters they are supposed to quantify. Also, character classes need to be wrapped in square brackets. This should work:
#"^(?:[a-zA-Z0-9]{3}|\d{3}\d{4})\d{5}$"
There are several good, automated regex testers out there. You may want to check out regexpal.

Although that may be a perfectly valid match, I would suggest rewriting it as:
^([a-zA-Z]{3}\d{5}|\d{8}|\d{12})$
which requires the string to match one of:
[a-zA-Z]{3}\d{5} three alpha and five numbers
\d{8} 8 digits or
\d{12} twelve digits.
Makes it easier to read, too...

I'm not 100% on your objective, but there are a few problems I can see right off the bat.
When you list the acceptable characters to match, like with a-zA-Z0-9, you need to put it inside brackets, like [a-zA-Z0-9] Using a ^ at the beginning will negate the contained characters, e.g. `[^a-zA-Z0-9]
Word characters can be matched like \w, which is equivalent to [a-zA-Z0-9_].
Quantifiers need to appear at the end of the match expression. So, instead of {3}[a-zA-Z0-9], you would need to write [a-zA-Z0-9]{3} (assuming you want to match three instances of a character that matches [a-zA-Z0-9]

Regular Expression for dialing prefix eg +44 etc

I realise making a regex for all internation numbers is futile. So as a compromise I need a regex that will check that a string starts with the international dialing code eg:
(+44) or (+33) etc.
I dont understand how to write regex's yet, so any help would be greatly appreciated.
P.s. It's for use in a c#.net project.
Thanks.

Try this
var regex=new Regex(#"^\(\+\d{1,4}\)");
I'm using the # bit before the string so you don't need to double escape \
This does
^ Match Start of string
\( Match (
\+ Match +
\d{1,4} Match 1-4 digits
\) Match bracket
Also as you are using c# you may wish to consider using Expresso as this helps you build and test regular expressions targeted at the .Net Regular expression library and can even generate c# code for you to use them.

This is a complex matter, since the phone number needs not to be formatted, so it may have a digit right after the country code. Since these codes can have a varying length, you will need a list of country codes to check for. America and Russia have 1 and 7 respectively, most European countries and larger other countries have a two digit code, but there are also codes with 3 digits (not more, I believe). So you'll need a list of 1 and 2 digit codes at least, and can assume 3 digits if your phone number does not start with any code in that list.
I'd get this clear before you even start thinking whether to build this using regex or not. It may be easier in a simple piece of code.

Shall this Regex do what I expect from it, that is, matching against "A1:B10,C3,D4:E1000"?

I'm currently writing a library where I wish to allow the user to be able to specify spreadsheet cell(s) under four possible alternatives:
A single cell: "A1";
Multiple contiguous cells: "A1:B10"
Multiple separate cells: "A1,B6,I60,AA2"
A mix of 2 and 3: "B2:B12,C13:C18,D4,E11000"
Then, to validate whether the input respects these formats, I intended to use a regular expression to match against. I have consulted this article on Wikipedia:
Regular Expression (Wikipedia)
And I also found this related SO question:
regex matching alpha character followed by 4 alphanumerics.
Based on the information provided within the above-linked articles, I would try with this Regex:
Default Readonly Property Cells(ByVal cellsAddresses As String) As ReadOnlyDictionary(Of String, ICell)
Get
Dim validAddresses As Regex = New Regex("A-Za-z0-9:,A-Za-z0-9")
If (Not validAddresses.IsMatch(cellsAddresses)) then _
Throw New FormatException("cellsAddresses")
// Proceed with getting the cells from the Interop here...
End Get
End Property
Questions
1. Is my regular expression correct? If not, please help me understand what expression I could use.
2. What exception is more likely to be the more meaningful between a FormatException and an InvalidExpressionException? I hesitate here, since it is related to the format under which the property expect the cells to be input, aside, I'm using an (regular) expression to match against.
Thank you kindly for your help and support! =)

I would try this one:
[A-Za-z]+[0-9]+([:,][A-Za-z]+[0-9]+)*
Explanation:
Between [] is a possible group of characters for a single position
[A-Za-z] means characters (letters) from 'A' to 'Z' and from 'a' to 'z'
[0-9] means characters (digits) from 0 to 9
A "+" appended to a part of a regex means: repeat that one or more times
A "*" means: repeat the previous part zero or more times.
( ) can be used to define a group
So [A-Za-z]+[0-9]+ matches one or more letters followed by one or more digits for a single cell-address.
Then that same block is repeated zero or more times, with a ',' or ':' separating the addresses.

Assuming that the column for the spreadsheet is any 1- or 2-letter value and the row is any positive number, a more complex but tighter answer still would be:
^[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*(:[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*)?(,[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*(:[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*)?)*$
"[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*" is the expression for a single cell reference. If you replace "[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*" in the above with then the complex expression becomes
^<cell>(:<cell>)?(,<cell>(:<cell>*)?)*$
which more clearly shows that it is a cell or a range followed by one or more "cell or range" entries with commas in between.
The row and column indicators could be further refined to give a tighter still, yet more complex expression. I suspect that the above could be simplified with look-ahead or look-behind assertions, but I admit those are not (yet) my strong suit.

I'd go with this one, I think:
(([A-Z]+[1-9]\d*:)?[A-Z]+[1-9]\d*,)*([A-Z]+[1-9]\d*:)?[A-Z]+[1-9]\d*
This only allows capital letters as the prefix. If you want case insensitivity, use RegexOptions.IgnoreCase.
You could simplify this by replacing [A-Z]+[1-9]\d* with plain old [A-Z]\d+, but that will only allow a one-letter prefix, and it also allows stuff like A0 and B01. Up to you.
EDIT:
Having thought hard about DocMax's mention of lookarounds, and using Hans Kesting's answer as inspiration, it occurs to me that this should work:
^[A-Z]+\d+((,|(?<!:\w*):)[A-Z]+\d+)*$
Or if you want something really twisted:
^([A-Z]+\d+(,|$|(?<!:\w*):))*(?<!,|:)
As in the previous example, replace \d+ with [1-9]\d* if you want to prevent leading zeros.
The idea behind the ,|(?<!\w*:): is that if a group is delimited by a comma, you want to let it through; but if it's a colon, it's only allowed if the previous delimiter wasn't a colon. The (,|$|...) version is madness, but it allows you to do it all with only one [A-Z]+\d+ block.
However! Even though this is shorter, and I'll admit I feel a teeny bit clever about it, I pity the poor fellow who has to come along and maintain it six months from now. It's fun from a code-golf standpoint, but I think it's best for practical purposes to go with the earlier version, which is a lot easier to read.

i think your regex is incorrect, try (([A-Za-z0-9]*)[:,]?)*
Edit : to correct the bug pointed out by Baud : (([A-Za-z0-9]*)[:,]?)*([A-Za-z0-9]+)
and finally - best version : (([A-Za-z]+[0-9]+)[:,]?)*([A-Za-z]+[0-9]+)
// ah ok this wont work probably... but to answer 1. - no i dont think your regex is correct
( ) form a group
[ ] form a charclass (you can use A-Z a-d 0-9 etc or just single characters)
? means 1 or 0
* means 0 or any
id suggest reading http://www.regular-expressions.info/reference.html .
thats where i learned regexes some time ago ;)
and for building expressions i use Rad Software Regular Expression Designer

Let's build this step by step.
If you are following an Excel addressing format, to match a single-cell entry in your CSL, you would use the regular expression:
[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*
This matches the following in sequence:
Any character in A to Z once or twice
Any digit in 1 to 9
Any digit zero or more times
The digit expression will prevent inputting a cell address with leading zeros.
To build the expression that allows for a cell address pair, repeat the expression preceded by a colon as optional.
[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*(:[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*)?
Now allow for repeating the pattern preceded by a comma zero or more times and add start and end string delimiters.
^[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*(:[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*)?(,[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*(:[A-Z]{1,2}[1-9]\d*)?)*$
Kind of long and obnoxious, I admit, but after trying enough variants, I can't find a way of shortening it.
Hope this is helpful.

Regex for Comma Separated Number or Just Number

This is something of a follow up from a previous question. The requirements have changed, and I'm looking for some help with coming up with regex for either a comma separated number or a number with no commas. Sample input is below, along with some failed attempts.
Any help is appreciated.
Acceptable input:
1,234,567
1234567
Unacceptable input:
1234,567
1,234567
Some failed attempts:
^(\d{1,3}(?:[,]\d{3})*)|((\d)*)$
^\d{1,3}((?:[,]?\d{3})*|(?:[,]\d{3})*)$
Original success:
^\d{1,3}(?:[,]\d{3})*$

Just add an "or one or more digits" to the end:
^(?:\d{1,3}(?:[,]\d{3})*|\d+)$
I think you had it almost right the first time and just didn't match up all your parentheses correctly.

Try this:
^\d{1,3}(?:(?:,\d{3})+|\d*)$
This will match any sequence that begins with one to three digits, followed by either
one or more segments of a comma followed by three digits, or
zero or more digits.

Why not use Int.TryParse() rathern then a regex?

Please see this answer for a definitive treatment of the “Is it a number?” question, including allowance for correctly comma-separated digit groups.

One thing i've noticed with all these is that the first bit of the regex allows for '0' based numbers to work. For example the number:
0,123,456
Would match using the accepted answer. I've been using:
((?<!\w)[+-]?[1-9][0-9]{,2}(?:,[0-9]{3})+)
Which also ensures that the number has nothing in front of it. It does not catch numbers of less then 1,000 however. This was to prevent ill-formatted numbers from being captured at all. If the final + were a ? the following numbers would be captured:
0,123
1,2 (as 2 separate numbers)
I have a strange set of numbers to match for (integers with commas, with spaces and without both), so i'm using pretty restrictive regexs to capture these groups.
Anyway, something to think about!