Timeline for Apex regex and non-capturing groups
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 6, 2016 at 20:44 | vote | accept | Grisk | ||
| Aug 6, 2016 at 20:44 | vote | accept | Grisk | ||
| Aug 6, 2016 at 20:44 | |||||
| Aug 6, 2016 at 20:44 | vote | accept | Grisk | ||
| Aug 6, 2016 at 20:44 | |||||
| Aug 4, 2016 at 23:07 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSalesforce/status/761337732589359104 | ||
| Aug 4, 2016 at 21:09 | answer | added | Mark Pond | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 19:02 | answer | added | Grisk | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 18:55 | history | edited | Adrian Larson♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 40 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2016 at 18:17 | comment | added | Grisk | No worries! Check out the demo I linked to, the "(\d+)" bit is where I'm capturing the number. The simpler example that I gave inline just shows the Salesforce parser failing when I have two noncapture groups, but that isn't the same as the "real" regex that I linked to. As to the efficiency quesiton, I don't think so, but I could be wrong. The * itself indicates zero or more, so the ? added at the end is redundant, I think. I'll have to read more about that one. | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 18:15 | comment | added | dBeltowski |
Also maybe not so relevant to the question, but wouldn't the regex be more efficient like this? ^(?:.*?)(?:{"id":)$
|
|
| Aug 4, 2016 at 18:14 | comment | added | dBeltowski |
Are you trying to get the id value 11111? My regex is a tad rusty but I don't see you actually capturing any information. Also with the $ indicating the end of the string wouldn't the regex you provided stop before getting to the 11111?
|
|
| Aug 4, 2016 at 17:54 | comment | added | Grisk | TLDR: yes. This object is coming back from a REST API that is fairly unstable. They are still updating it constantly, and it currently contains a massive number of different fields that I can't prevent the query from returning. All I need is the ID, and I thought that writing a regular expression for this would be fairly straightforward 😅 Since this code has to run quite often, I wanted to avoid the overhead of serializing massive objects that will need to be constantly updated in step with the external service. | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 17:52 | comment | added | Mark Pond | Any particular reason you want to use regex instead of deserializing into a concrete type or map structure? | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 17:43 | history | asked | Grisk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |