On 10/28/05, Tom Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would do it with a small class like this:
>
> class mac{
> var $mac='';
> var $is_valid = false;
> function mac($mac){
> $mac = preg_replace('/[^0-9A-F]/','',strtoupper($mac));
> if($this->is_valid =
> preg_match('/^(\w{2})(\w
Hi,
Thursday, October 27, 2005, 3:15:30 AM, you wrote:
JG> I am having a problem with a couple of function I have written to check
JG> for a type of string, attempt to fix it and pass it back to the main
JG> function. Any help is appreciated.
I would do it with a small class like this:
is_valid
On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 00:00 +0200, Jochem Maas wrote:
> gonna jump on your thread there Jasper, I would
> like to comment on your function and ask you a question:
>
> which is 'better' (for what), preg_*() or ereg[i]*()?
I prefer preg_*(), but I used eregi() because I couldn't be bothered
figurin
Jochem Maas wrote:
Richard Heyes wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
> gonna jump on your thread there Jasper, I would
> like to comment on your function and ask you a question:
>
> which is 'better' (for what), preg_*() or ereg[i]*()?
preg_*, for anything. They're faster, and more versatile.
coo
Richard Heyes wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
> gonna jump on your thread there Jasper, I would
> like to comment on your function and ask you a question:
>
> which is 'better' (for what), preg_*() or ereg[i]*()?
preg_*, for anything. They're faster, and more versatile.
cool cheers.
I guess you
Jochem Maas wrote:
> gonna jump on your thread there Jasper, I would
> like to comment on your function and ask you a question:
>
> which is 'better' (for what), preg_*() or ereg[i]*()?
preg_*, for anything. They're faster, and more versatile.
--
Richard Heyes
http://www.phpguru.org
--
PHP Gene
gonna jump on your thread there Jasper, I would
like to comment on your function and ask you a question:
which is 'better' (for what), preg_*() or ereg[i]*()?
Jasper Bryant-Greene wrote:
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 12:24 -0600, Jason Gerfen wrote:
The code I just showed you is supposed to do the fol
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 12:24 -0600, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> The code I just showed you is supposed to do the following, the
> chk_mac() returns a true or false on the vars $mac1, $mac2 and $mac3.
> $mac3 is the only var that should not be thrown into the fix_mac()
> function which is working corre
The code I just showed you is supposed to do the following, the
chk_mac() returns a true or false on the vars $mac1, $mac2 and $mac3.
$mac3 is the only var that should not be thrown into the fix_mac()
function which is working correctly. The problem is when $mac1 and
$mac2 get put into the fi
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 12:07 -0600, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> Um I did actually, but I will re-interate the problem with more detail.
>
> the vars $mac1, $mac2, & $mac3 are to get passed to the chk_mac()
> function which determines if it is a valid hex representation of a h/w
> address, if it does no
Um I did actually, but I will re-interate the problem with more detail.
the vars $mac1, $mac2, & $mac3 are to get passed to the chk_mac()
function which determines if it is a valid hex representation of a h/w
address, if it does not meet the criteria of having a ":" separating
every two charac
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 11:15 -0600, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> I am having a problem with a couple of function I have written to check
> for a type of string, attempt to fix it and pass it back to the main
> function. Any help is appreciated.
[snip]
Would you mind telling us what the problem was?
--
Gerard Samuel a écrit:
Curt Zirzow wrote:
Gerard Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
or even
preg_match('/^[a-z0-9\-_\.]+\.[a-z0-9]{' . $foo . ', ' . $bar .
'}$/', $some_string)
I think, you Forgot, a \ before the $ at the end of the expression...
that should work.
Unfortunately it doesn'
Curt Zirzow wrote:
Gerard Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
or even
preg_match('/^[a-z0-9\-_\.]+\.[a-z0-9]{' . $foo . ', ' . $bar . '}$/',
$some_string)
that should work.
Unfortunately it doesn't for some reason. Don't know why.
but you could do this:
$pattern = "/^[a-z0-9\-_\.]+\.[a-z
Gerard Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone had any success with using variables in a regex shown below??
>
> $foo = 3;
> $bar = 4;
> preg_match('/^[a-z0-9\-_\.]+\.[a-z0-9]{$foo, $bar}$/', $some_string)
You have single quotes, so php wont expand the variables inside.
>
> or even
> pre
use \? instead of ?
Boaz Yahav a écrit :
> When i try to use preg_match on strings that have "?" inside them it
> seems to not work.
> Any ideas how to bypass this?
>
> thanks
>
> berber
--
Marius Ursache (3563 || 3494)
\|/ \|/
"@'/
Boaz Yahav a écrit :
> When i try to use preg_match on strings that have "?" inside them it
> seems to not work.
> Any ideas how to bypass this?
>
> thanks
>
> berber
--
Marius Ursache (3563 || 3494)
\|/ \|/
"@'/ ,. \`@"
On Wednesday 18 April 2001 22:03, you wrote:
> and do various searches etc. I was curious as to what most people find
> the best way keep thier mysql queries from getting messed up by user
> entered data. None of my searches or database data has or needs any
Simply using addslashes () or the mag
I use a special function just for reforming input, but they use the
following bits with PCRE:
$replace_wordwhite = '/[^\w\s]/';
$replace_word = '/\W/';
$replace_num = '/\D/';
$replace_email = '/[^\w\-\.@]/';
Works pretty well and it's quite useful for killing useless input without
returning
19 matches
Mail list logo
