Regular Expression Help

[flamelily]

Originally Posted by itimpi

An easier way to do this is to use '\d*' to match a number of any length. Another useful one along these lines is '\s*' to match any number of white space characters.

oh thats perfect - \d* worked! MANY thanks

[drone207A]

can anybody help me,
Im trying to get rid of "Book tittle (1975)"
The book title part is no problem... but the (1975) is killing me.
Maybe I'm missing something, but when I add that to the Regex, it highlights the 1975 but not the brackets.
Is there anyway of getting rid of all "(1975)" without affecting other numbers throughout the book?

Any help would be appreciated.

[itimpi]

Did you escape the bracket characters by preceding them with a backslash character? Unescaped brackets are used for grouping within regex.

[drone207A]

Originally Posted by itimpi

Did you escape the bracket characters by preceding them with a backslash character? Unescaped brackets are used for grouping within regex.

EDITSorry I dont really understand what you mean
Could you please give me an example?

OK I worked it out.. thanks for your help!

[itimpi]

\(1975\)

That technique is required for any characters that have special meaning in regex syntax where you want the actual character. It is required for many of the non-alphanumeric characters (punctuation).

[drone207A]

Originally Posted by itimpi

\(1975\)

That technique is required for any characters that have special meaning in regex syntax where you want the actual character. It is required for many of the non-alphanumeric characters (punctuation).

Oh I was late posting this by minutes!

Thanks again..

[hrynkiw]

Thanks to whomever resurrected this thread. Reading through it has been very instructional.

[Manichean]

Originally Posted by hrynkiw

Thanks to whomever resurrected this thread. Reading through it has been very instructional.

Moderator Notice
Just as a side note, since you mentioned resurrection: Generally, we prefer if people create new threads instead of reopening old ones. Calibre develops so fast that information in threads as old as a week may be outdated.

[hrynkiw]

Yup, and if this thread had been about some feature of Calibre, that's what I would have done. But I don't think regular expressions have changed all that much even in a couple of years.

Cheers.

[Manichean]

Originally Posted by hrynkiw

Yup, and if this thread had been about some feature of Calibre, that's what I would have done. But I don't think regular expressions have changed all that much even in a couple of years.

Their practical application in Calibre has. Plus, we've had a few huge catch-all threads in the past, and they were absolutely horrendous for users to find questions that have already been answered.

[ZaMotH]

Hi all. My first post was not posted in the right place.

All right, here are possible my format lists :
1) Series # 00.zip
2) Series # 00 - Title.zip
3) Series # 00 - Title [author].zip
4) Series # 00 [Author].zip
5) Title.zip
6) Title [Author].zip

Without the author, I found out that this would work perfectly for 1, 2 and 5
(?P<series>.+) # (?P<series_index>\d+)( - (?P<title>.+)|)

as for case 1, series and series_index are filled, AND title = Series # 00



But everytime I try to add the " [Author]", I get messed up all around.
I know the parsing should go like ( \[(?P<author>.+)\[)
But I can not make it conditional

Can anyone help ?

[Manichean]

Originally Posted by ZaMotH

Hi all. My first post was not posted in the right place.

All right, here are possible my format lists :
1) Series # 00.zip
2) Series # 00 - Title.zip
3) Series # 00 - Title [author].zip
4) Series # 00 [Author].zip
5) Title.zip
6) Title [Author].zip

Without the author, I found out that this would work perfectly for 1, 2 and 5
(?P<series>.+) # (?P<series_index>\d+)( - (?P<title>.+)|)

as for case 1, series and series_index are filled, AND title = Series # 00



But everytime I try to add the " [Author]", I get messed up all around.
I know the parsing should go like ( \[(?P<author>.+)\[)
But I can not make it conditional

Can anyone help ?

Allow me to just quote myself a little bit:

Originally Posted by Manichean

Moderator Notice
Just as a side note, since you mentioned resurrection: Generally, we prefer if people create new threads instead of reopening old ones. Calibre develops so fast that information in threads as old as a week may be outdated.

Originally Posted by Manichean

[W]e've had a few huge catch-all threads in the past, and they were absolutely horrendous for users to find questions that have already been answered.

Moderator Notice
In addition, you've actually managed to crosspost from this thread, which is where answers should go, since it's already active. I'm closing this thread down, so it can finally rest in peace.