On 18 May 2012, at 14:32, Jim Giner wrote: > OK - I don't yet understand how this works, but it seems to work for almost > all cases. The one erroneous result I get is from a value of 0040 (which I > convert to 00:40 before hitting the regexp). It comes thru as Ok. If you > have a fix for that I'd appreciate it - otherwise I'll have to devote some > book-time to mastering this string and come up with a fix myself.
Based on your requirements, 00:40 is completely valid. Why do you think it should be invalid? -- Stuart Dallas 3ft9 Ltd http://3ft9.com/
