You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After some performance testing and consideration for readability, I think that patterns like [0-9] or [[:digit:]] is better than \d as the meaning is more clear. Since there seems to be no performance difference between any of these patterns; readability is prefered over the more condensed version.
Expression
Meaning
Prefered option 1
Prefered option 2
\d
any decimal digit
[0-9]
[[:digit:]]
\D
any character that is not a decimal digit
[^0-9]
--
\w
any alphanumeric character (aka word character)
[a-zA-Z0-9_]
[[:word:]]
[a-z]
Lowercase letters
[a-z]
[[:lower:]]
[A-Z]
Uppercase letters
[A-Z]
[[:upper:]]
\xYY
Hexadecimal character YY
[0-9a-fA-F]
[[:xdigit:]]
Preference to readability for pcre/regx patterns should be included in the coding standard.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think something should be done in regards to a rule for pcre regx patterns. but as I don't have the time or skills to address I will Suggest voting to close as a Stale issue. @wilsonge@mbabker
After some performance testing and consideration for readability, I think that patterns like [0-9] or [[:digit:]] is better than \d as the meaning is more clear. Since there seems to be no performance difference between any of these patterns; readability is prefered over the more condensed version.
Preference to readability for pcre/regx patterns should be included in the coding standard.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: