Remove backslash from nested json [duplicate] - json

When I create a string containing backslashes, they get duplicated:
>>> my_string = "why\does\it\happen?"
>>> my_string
'why\\does\\it\\happen?'
Why?

What you are seeing is the representation of my_string created by its __repr__() method. If you print it, you can see that you've actually got single backslashes, just as you intended:
>>> print(my_string)
why\does\it\happen?
The string below has three characters in it, not four:
>>> 'a\\b'
'a\\b'
>>> len('a\\b')
3
You can get the standard representation of a string (or any other object) with the repr() built-in function:
>>> print(repr(my_string))
'why\\does\\it\\happen?'
Python represents backslashes in strings as \\ because the backslash is an escape character - for instance, \n represents a newline, and \t represents a tab.
This can sometimes get you into trouble:
>>> print("this\text\is\not\what\it\seems")
this ext\is
ot\what\it\seems
Because of this, there needs to be a way to tell Python you really want the two characters \n rather than a newline, and you do that by escaping the backslash itself, with another one:
>>> print("this\\text\is\what\you\\need")
this\text\is\what\you\need
When Python returns the representation of a string, it plays safe, escaping all backslashes (even if they wouldn't otherwise be part of an escape sequence), and that's what you're seeing. However, the string itself contains only single backslashes.
More information about Python's string literals can be found at: String and Bytes literals in the Python documentation.

As Zero Piraeus's answer explains, using single backslashes like this (outside of raw string literals) is a bad idea.
But there's an additional problem: in the future, it will be an error to use an undefined escape sequence like \d, instead of meaning a literal backslash followed by a d. So, instead of just getting lucky that your string happened to use \d instead of \t so it did what you probably wanted, it will definitely not do what you want.
As of 3.6, it already raises a DeprecationWarning, although most people don't see those. It will become a SyntaxError in some future version.
In many other languages, including C, using a backslash that doesn't start an escape sequence means the backslash is ignored.
In a few languages, including Python, a backslash that doesn't start an escape sequence is a literal backslash.
In some languages, to avoid confusion about whether the language is C-like or Python-like, and to avoid the problem with \Foo working but \foo not working, a backslash that doesn't start an escape sequence is illegal.

Related

two back slash in SQL procedure with Regular expression

i'm working on a SQL procedure where i came across a Regular expression which contains this piece -
REGEXP '\\s*count\\s*\\('
i do not understand why there are two backslash ? what can be inferred from this code.
Backslash is processed at multiple levels.
It's the escape prefix in regular expressions: it makes special characters like . and ( be treated literally, and is used to created escape sequences like \s (which means any whitespace character).
But it's also the escape prefix in string literals, used for things like \n (newline) and \b (backspace). So in order for the regular expression character to get a literal backslash, you need to escape the backslash itself.
This is common in many programming languages, although a few have "raw string literals" where escape sequences are not processed, specifically to avoid having to double the slashes so much.

When use parameters in JSON POST data in Jmeter, another json entity is changed [duplicate]

I am tired of always trying to guess, if I should escape special characters like '()[]{}|' etc. when using many implementations of regexps.
It is different with, for example, Python, sed, grep, awk, Perl, rename, Apache, find and so on.
Is there any rule set which tells when I should, and when I should not, escape special characters? Does it depend on the regexp type, like PCRE, POSIX or extended regexps?
Which characters you must and which you mustn't escape indeed depends on the regex flavor you're working with.
For PCRE, and most other so-called Perl-compatible flavors, escape these outside character classes:
.^$*+?()[{\|
and these inside character classes:
^-]\
For POSIX extended regexes (ERE), escape these outside character classes (same as PCRE):
.^$*+?()[{\|
Escaping any other characters is an error with POSIX ERE.
Inside character classes, the backslash is a literal character in POSIX regular expressions. You cannot use it to escape anything. You have to use "clever placement" if you want to include character class metacharacters as literals. Put the ^ anywhere except at the start, the ] at the start, and the - at the start or the end of the character class to match these literally, e.g.:
[]^-]
In POSIX basic regular expressions (BRE), these are metacharacters that you need to escape to suppress their meaning:
.^$*[\
Escaping parentheses and curly brackets in BREs gives them the special meaning their unescaped versions have in EREs. Some implementations (e.g. GNU) also give special meaning to other characters when escaped, such as \? and +. Escaping a character other than .^$*(){} is normally an error with BREs.
Inside character classes, BREs follow the same rule as EREs.
If all this makes your head spin, grab a copy of RegexBuddy. On the Create tab, click Insert Token, and then Literal. RegexBuddy will add escapes as needed.
Modern RegEx Flavors (PCRE)
Includes C, C++, Delphi, EditPad, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP (preg), PostgreSQL, PowerGREP, PowerShell, Python, REALbasic, Real Studio, Ruby, TCL, VB.Net, VBScript, wxWidgets, XML Schema, Xojo, XRegExp.PCRE compatibility may vary
    Anywhere: . ^ $ * + - ? ( ) [ ] { } \ |
Legacy RegEx Flavors (BRE/ERE)
Includes awk, ed, egrep, emacs, GNUlib, grep, PHP (ereg), MySQL, Oracle, R, sed.PCRE support may be enabled in later versions or by using extensions
ERE/awk/egrep/emacs
    Outside a character class: . ^ $ * + ? ( ) [ { } \ |
    Inside a character class: ^ - [ ]
BRE/ed/grep/sed
    Outside a character class: . ^ $ * [ \
    Inside a character class: ^ - [ ]
    For literals, don't escape: + ? ( ) { } |
    For standard regex behavior, escape: \+ \? \( \) \{ \} \|
Notes
If unsure about a specific character, it can be escaped like \xFF
Alphanumeric characters cannot be escaped with a backslash
Arbitrary symbols can be escaped with a backslash in PCRE, but not BRE/ERE (they must only be escaped when required). For PCRE ] - only need escaping within a character class, but I kept them in a single list for simplicity
Quoted expression strings must also have the surrounding quote characters escaped, and often with backslashes doubled-up (like "(\")(/)(\\.)" versus /(")(\/)(\.)/ in JavaScript)
Aside from escapes, different regex implementations may support different modifiers, character classes, anchors, quantifiers, and other features. For more details, check out regular-expressions.info, or use regex101.com to test your expressions live
Unfortunately there really isn't a set set of escape codes since it varies based on the language you are using.
However, keeping a page like the Regular Expression Tools Page or this Regular Expression Cheatsheet can go a long way to help you quickly filter things out.
POSIX recognizes multiple variations on regular expressions - basic regular expressions (BRE) and extended regular expressions (ERE). And even then, there are quirks because of the historical implementations of the utilities standardized by POSIX.
There isn't a simple rule for when to use which notation, or even which notation a given command uses.
Check out Jeff Friedl's Mastering Regular Expressions book.
Unfortunately, the meaning of things like ( and \( are swapped between Emacs style regular expressions and most other styles. So if you try to escape these you may be doing the opposite of what you want.
So you really have to know what style you are trying to quote.
Really, there isn't. there are about a half-zillion different regex syntaxes; they seem to come down to Perl, EMACS/GNU, and AT&T in general, but I'm always getting surprised too.
Sometimes simple escaping is not possible with the characters you've listed. For example, using a backslash to escape a bracket isn't going to work in the left hand side of a substitution string in sed, namely
sed -e 's/foo\(bar/something_else/'
I tend to just use a simple character class definition instead, so the above expression becomes
sed -e 's/foo[(]bar/something_else/'
which I find works for most regexp implementations.
BTW Character classes are pretty vanilla regexp components so they tend to work in most situations where you need escaped characters in regexps.
Edit: After the comment below, just thought I'd mention the fact that you also have to consider the difference between finite state automata and non-finite state automata when looking at the behaviour of regexp evaluation.
You might like to look at "the shiny ball book" aka Effective Perl (sanitised Amazon link), specifically the chapter on regular expressions, to get a feel for then difference in regexp engine evaluation types.
Not all the world's a PCRE!
Anyway, regexp's are so clunky compared to SNOBOL! Now that was an interesting programming course! Along with the one on Simula.
Ah the joys of studying at UNSW in the late '70's! (-:
https://perldoc.perl.org/perlre.html#Quoting-metacharacters and https://perldoc.perl.org/functions/quotemeta.html
In the official documentation, such characters are called metacharacters. Example of quoting:
my $regex = quotemeta($string)
s/$regex/something/
For PHP, "it is always safe to precede a non-alphanumeric with "\" to specify that it stands for itself." - http://php.net/manual/en/regexp.reference.escape.php.
Except if it's a " or '. :/
To escape regex pattern variables (or partial variables) in PHP use preg_quote()
To know when and what to escape without attempts is necessary to understand precisely the chain of contexts the string pass through. You will specify the string from the farthest side to its final destination which is the memory handled by the regexp parsing code.
Be aware how the string in memory is processed: if can be a plain string inside the code, or a string entered to the command line, but a could be either an interactive command line or a command line stated inside a shell script file, or inside a variable in memory mentioned by the code, or an (string)argument through further evaluation, or a string containing code generated dynamically with any sort of encapsulation...
Each of this context assigned some characters with special functionality.
When you want to pass the character literally without using its special function (local to the context), than that's the case you have to escape it, for the next context... which might need some other escape characters which might additionally need to be escaped in the preceding context(s).
Furthermore there can be things like character encoding (the most insidious is utf-8 because it look like ASCII for common characters, but might be optionally interpreted even by the terminal depending on its settings so it might behave differently, then the encoding attribute of HTML/XML, it's necessary to understand the process precisely right.
E.g. A regexp in the command line starting with perl -npe, needs to be transferred to a set of exec system calls connecting as pipe the file handles, each of this exec system calls just has a list of arguments that were separated by (non escaped)spaces, and possibly pipes(|) and redirection (> N> N>&M), parenthesis, interactive expansion of * and ?, $(()) ... (all this are special characters used by the *sh which might appear to interfere with the character of the regular expression in the next context, but they are evaluated in order: before the command line. The command line is read by a program as bash/sh/csh/tcsh/zsh, essentially inside double quote or single quote the escape is simpler but it is not necessary to quote a string in the command line because mostly the space has to be prefixed with backslash and the quote are not necessary leaving available the expand functionality for characters * and ?, but this parse as different context as within quote. Then when the command line is evaluated the regexp obtained in memory (not as written in the command line) receives the same treatment as it would be in a source file.
For regexp there is character-set context within square brackets [ ], perl regular expression can be quoted by a large set of non alfa-numeric characters (E.g. m// or m:/better/for/path: ...).
You have more details about characters in other answer, which are very specific to the final regexp context. As I noted you mention that you find the regexp escape with attempts, that's probably because different context has different set of character that confused your memory of attempts (often backslash is the character used in those different context to escape a literal character instead of its function).
For Ionic (Typescript) you have to double slash in order to scape the characters.
For example (this is to match some special characters):
"^(?=.*[\\]\\[!¡\'=ªº\\-\\_ç##$%^&*(),;\\.?\":{}|<>\+\\/])"
Pay attention to this ] [ - _ . / characters. They have to be double slashed. If you don't do that, you are going to have a type error in your code.
to avoid having to worry about which regex variant and all the bespoke peculiarties, just use this generic function that covers every regex variant other than BRE (unless they have unicode multi-byte chars that are meta) :
jot -s '' -c - 32 126 |
mawk '
function ___(__,_) {
return substr(_="",
gsub("[][!-/_\140:-#{-~]","[&]",__),
gsub("["(_="\\\\")"^]",_ "&",__))__
} ($++NF = ___($!_))^_'
!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?
#ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_
`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~
[!]["][#][$][%][&]['][(][)][*][+][,][-][.][/]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [:][;][<][=][>][?]
[#] ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ [[]\\ []]\^ [_]
[`] abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz [{][|][}][~]
square-brackets are much easier to deal with, since there's no risk of triggering warning messages about "escaping too much", e.g. :
function ____(_) {
return substr("", gsub("[[:punct:]]","\\\\&",_))_
}
\!\"\#\$\%\&\'\(\)\*\+\,\-\.\/ 0123456789\:\;\<\=\>\?
\#ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ\[\\\]\^\_\`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz \{\|\}\~
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\!' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\"' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\#' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\%' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\&' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\,' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\:' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\;' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\=' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\#' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\_' is not a known regexp operator
gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: regexp escape sequence `\~' is not a known regexp operator
Using Raku (formerly known as Perl_6)
Works (backslash or quote all non-alphanumeric characters except underscore):
~$ raku -e 'say $/ if "#.*?" ~~ m/ \# \. \* \? /; #works fine'
「#.*?」
There exist six flavors of Regular Expression languages, according to Damian Conway's pdf/talk "Everything You Know About Regexes Is Wrong". Raku represents a significant (~15 year) re-working of standard Perl(5)/PCRE Regular Expressions.
In those 15 years the Perl_6 / Raku language experts decided that all non-alphanumeric characters (except underscore) shall be reserved as Regex metacharacters even if no present usage exists. To denote non-alphanumeric characters (except underscore) as literals, backslash or escape them.
So the above example prints the $/ match variable if a match to a literal #.*? character sequence is found. Below is what happens if you don't: # is interpreted as the start of a comment, . dot is interpreted as any character (including whitespace), * asterisk is interpreted as a zero-or-more quantifier, and ? question mark is interpreted as either a zero-or-one quantifier or a frugal (i.e. non-greedy) quantifier-modifier (depending on context):
Errors:
~$ ~$ raku -e 'say $/ if "#.*?" ~~ m/ # . * ? /; #ERROR!'
===SORRY!===
Regex not terminated.
at -e:1
------> y $/ if "#.*?" ~~ m/ # . * ? /; #ERROR!⏏<EOL>
Regex not terminated.
at -e:1
------> y $/ if "#.*?" ~~ m/ # . * ? /; #ERROR!⏏<EOL>
Couldn't find terminator / (corresponding / was at line 1)
at -e:1
------> y $/ if "#.*?" ~~ m/ # . * ? /; #ERROR!⏏<EOL>
expecting any of:
/
https://docs.raku.org/language/regexes
https://raku.org/

Escape square bracket in Tcl_StringCaseMatch

I am using Tcl_StringCaseMatch function in C++ code for string pattern matching. Everything works fine until input pattern or string has [] bracket. For example, like:
str1 = pq[0]
pattern = pq[*]
Tcl_StringCaseMatch is not working i.e returning false for above inputs.
How to avoid [] in pattern matching?
The problem is [] are special characters in the pattern matching. You need to escape them using a backslash to have them treated like plain characters
pattern= "pq\\[*\\]"
I don't think this should affect the string as well. The reason for double slashing is you want to pass the backslash itself to the TCL engine.
For the casual reader:
[] have a special meaning in TCL in general, beyond the pattern matching role they take here - "run command" (like `` or $() in shells), but [number] will have no effect, and the brackets are treated normally - thus the string str1 does not need escaping here.
For extra confusion:
TCL will interpret ] with no preceding [ as a normal character by default. I feel that's getting too confusing, and would rather that TCL complains on unbalanced brackets. As OP mentions though, this allows you to forgo the final two backslashes and use "pq\\[*]". I dislike this, and rather make it obvious both are treated normally and not the usual TCL way, but to each her/is own.

How to trigger a node using email regex in Watson Conversation?

I am trying to extract an email address from user input text in Watson Conversation. First thing first, I need to trigger a particular node using an if condition like this:
input.text.contains('\^(([^<>()[].,;:s#\"]+(.[^<>()[].,;:s#\"]+)*)|(\".+\"))#(([[‌​0-9]{1,3}.[0-9]{1,3}‌​.[0-9]{1,3}.[0-9]{1,‌​3}])|(([a-zA-Z-0-9]+‌​.)+[a-zA-Z]{2,}))$\')
But it doesn't work, I tried a lot of regexes that I found on the internet but none of them work. Does anyone know how to write a proper regex?
I suggest using a much simpler, approximate, regex to match emails that you need to use with String.matches(string regexp) method that accepts a regex:
input.text.matches('^\\S+#\\S+\\.\\S+$')
Do not forget to double escape backslashes so as to define literal backslashes in the pattern.
Pattern details:
^ - start of string
\\S+ - one or more non-whitespace chars
# - a # symbol
\\S+ - one or more non-whitespace chars
\\. - a literal dot
\\S+ - one or more non-whitespace chars
$ - end of string.

problems using replaceText for special characters: [ ]

I want to replace "\cite{foo123a}" with "[1]" and backwards. So far I was able to replace text with the following command
body.replaceText('.cite{foo}', '[1]');
but I did not manage to use
body.replaceText('\cite{foo}', '[1]');
body.replaceText('\\cite{foo}', '[1]');
Why?
The back conversion I cannot get to work at all
body.replaceText('[1]', '\\cite{foo}');
this will replace only the "1" not the [ ], this means the [] are interpreted as regex character set, escaping them will not help
body.replaceText('\[1\]', '\\cite{foo}');//no effect, still a char set
body.replaceText('/\[1\]/', '\\cite{foo}');//no matches
The documentation states
A subset of the JavaScript regular expression features are not fully supported, such as capture groups and mode modifiers.
Can I find a full description of what is supported and what not somewhere?
I'm not familiar with Google Apps Script, but this looks like ordinary regular expression troubles.
Your second conversion is not working because the string literal '\[1\]' is just the same as '[1]'. You want to quote the text \[1\] as a string literal, which means '\\[1\\]'. Slashes inside of a string literal have no relevant meaning; in that case you have written a pattern which matches the text /1/.
Your first conversion is not working because {...} denotes a quantifier, not literal braces, so you need \\\\cite\\{foo\\}. (The four backslashes are because to match a literal \ in a regular expression is \\, and to make that a string literal it is \\\\ — two escaped backslashes.)