I am trying to use Deep Link Kit to route both of these paths:
myapp://page/2 // <- doesn't work
myapp://page/2/7 //<- works
The route handler I've registered at the moment is:
router.registerHandlerClass(AppRouteHandler.self, forRoute: "page/:number/:commentID(.*)")
I added the (.*) for the regex of zero or more comment IDs. However this doesn't seem to make any difference as it only works when you have both the :number and :commentID defined. I've also tried myapp://page/2/ but that doesn't work either. Any help would be appreciated.
UPDATE
One solution is to register the two routes separately:
router.registerHandlerClass(AppRouteHandler.self, forRoute: "page/:number")
router.registerHandlerClass(AppRouteHandler.self, forRoute: "page/:number/:commentID")
but ideally, I'd be able to use regex.
I counter this problem too, after combine you solution I came up with this solution
router.registerHandlerClass(AppRouteHandler.self, forRoute: "page/:number/?:commentID(.*)")
That will ignore the second /, and your commentID will be set with empty string
Related
I am using Discourse forum software. As in its current state, Discourse presents links to topic in two ways, with and without a post number at the end.
Example:
forum.domain.com/t/some-topic/23
forum.domain.com/t/some-topic/23/5
The first one is what I want and the second one I want to not be displayed in the forum at all.
I've written a post about it on Discourse forum but didn't receive an answer what Regex to put in the permalink normalization input field in the admin section.
I was told that there is an option to do it using permalink normalization like so (It's an example shown in the admin under the Regex input text, I didn't write it):
permalink normalizations
Apply the following regex before matching permalinks,
for example: /(topic.)\?./\1 will strip query strings from topic routes.
Format is regex+string use \1 etc. to access captures
I don't know what Regex I should use in order to remove the numerical value of the post number from links. I need it only for topic links.
This is the routes.rb routing library and this is the permalink.rb library (I think that the permalink library should help get a better clue how to achieve this). I have no idea how to approach this, because it seems that I need some knowledge of the Discourse routing to make it work. For example, I don't understand why (topic.) is part of the regex, what does it mean, so their example doesn't help me to find a solution.
In the admin I have an input field in which I nee to put the normalization regex code.
I need help with the Regex. I need the regex to work with all topics.
Things I've tried that didn't work out:
/(\/\d+)\/\d+$/\1
/(t/[^/]+/\d+).*/\1
/(\/\d+)\/[0-9]+$/\1
/(\/\d+)\/[0-9]+/\1
/(\/\d+)\/\d+$/\1/
/(forum.domain.com(\/\w+)*\/\d+)\/\d+(?=\s|$)/\1
Note: The Permalink Normalization input field treats the character | as a separator to separate between several Regex expressions.
I think this may be the expression you are looking for to put inside de settings field:
/(t\/.*\/\d+)(\/\d+)/\1
You can see it working on Rubular.
However, the code that generates the url is not using the normalization code, so the expression is being ignored.
You could try normalizing the permalink there:
def last_post_url
url = "#{Discourse.base_uri}/t/#{slug}/#{id}/#{posts_count}"
url = Permalink.normalize_url url
url
end
I didn't truly understand your question, but if I got it right, you are saying that you want links with /some-number at the end but don't what links with /some-number/some-number at the end. If that is the case, the regex is:
forum\.domain\.com\/t\/[^0-9\/]+\/\d{1,9}$
You can replace 'forum' with your forum name and 'domain' with your domain name.
This will remove trailing "/<digits>" after another "/<digits>":
/(forum.domain.com(\/\w+)*\/\d+)\/\d+(?=\s|$)/\1
I'm trying to create a dynamic url pattern for the following url:
http://domain.com/content/pagetitle
This is what I have added in the url.rules:
'content/<page:.*?>' => 'cms/default/home',
this works fine for /content/pagetitle.html but not for /content/pagetitle while my url suffix is empty. Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong?
Your problem might also be that the regex "any character" character . gets escape if outside of a named group.
<controller:[a-zA-Z]>/(.*)
turns into
<controller:[a-zA-Z]>/(\.*)
// ^ It escaped it for us even though we didn't want it
The solution is simply to make group for it:
<controller:[a-zA-Z]>/<wildcard:.*>
Not sure why you are adding the .*? there...
The following example should work
'content/<page:.+>' => 'cms/default/home',
You do not need a wildcard in this case:
'content/<page>' => 'cms/default/home',
I am trying to construct a route that routes to a specific product page.
The product exists in a category. Categories may also exist in categories. I am trying to construct the URL like
my-site.com/products/category/category/category/product
The amount of categories is able to change but the last parameter will always be the name of the product.
Is there any way to construct a route for this?
A solution exactly for you
I faced the same problem in the past and solved it a bit differently to what others will advise you here. Most of solutions will talk about *catch-all parameter. In your case this means that you'd have to parse the product out yourself. Manually. Because catch-all parameter may only be the last parameter in route definition.
Catch-all anywhere in the route
If you think of it carefully, you can actually realise that catch all parameter can actually be defined anywhere in the route as long as you have all other segments present. So I've written such route class that does all that and successfully runs in production on a heavy traffic website.
My blog post has all the information about it as well as all the code that will solve your problem:
Custom Asp.net MVC route class with catch-all segment anywhere in the URL
This makes it possible for you to define your route as:
products/{*categories}/{productId}
If you think of the catch-all parameter even further you could also get to the point that a single route definition could have several catch-all parameters as long as at least one segment between them is static. But my class isn't able to do this, because your scenario with just one arbitrary segment set is much more common.
I am creating a parser that wards off against spamming and harvesting of emails from a block of text that comes from tinyMCE (so it may or may not have html tags in it)
I've tried regexes and so far this has been successful:
/\b[A-Z0-9._%+-]+#[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}\b/i
problem is, i need to ignore all email addresses with mailto hrefs. for example:
test#mail.com
should only return the second email add.
To get a background of what im doing, im reversing the email addresses in a block so the above example would look like this:
moc.liam#tset
problem with my current regex is that it also replaces the one in href. Is there a way for me to do this with a single regex? Or do i have to check for one then the other? Is there a way for me to do this just by using gsub or do I have to use some nokogiri/hpricot magicks and whatnot to parse the mailtos? Thanks in advance!
Here were my references btw:
so.com/questions/504860/extract-email-addresses-from-a-block-of-text
so.com/questions/1376149/regexp-for-extracting-a-mailto-address
im also testing using this:
http://rubular.com/
edit
here's my current helper code:
def email_obfuscator(text)
text.gsub(/\b[A-Z0-9._%+-]+#[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}\b/i) { |m|
m = "<span class='anti-spam'>#{m.reverse}</span>"
}
end
which results in this:
<a target="_self" href="mailto:<span class='anti-spam'>moc.liamg#tset</span>"><span class="anti-spam">moc.liamg#tset</span></a>
Another option if lookbehind doesn't work:
/\b(mailto:)?([A-Z0-9._%+-]+#[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4})\b/i
This would match all emails, then you can manually check if first captured group is "mailto:" then skip this match.
Would this work?
/\b(?<!mailto:)[A-Z0-9._%+-]+#[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}\b/i
The (?<!mailto:) is a negative lookbehind, which will ignore any matches starting with mailto:
I don't have Ruby set up at work, unfortunately, but it worked with PHP when I tested it...
Why not just store all the matched emails in an array and remove any duplicates? You can do this easily with the ruby standard library and (I imagine) it's probably quicker/more maintainable than adding more complexity to your regex.
emails = ["email_one#example.com", "email_one#example.com", "email_two#example.com"]
emails.uniq # => ["email_one#example.com", "email_two#example.com"]
I am trying to write a route that matches the following URL format:
/category1/category2/S/
where the number of categories is unknown, so there could be 1 category or there could be 10 (1..N).
I cannot use a catch all becuase the categories are not at the end of the URL.
I am actually routing to a web form here (using Phil Haack's example http://haacked.com/archive/2008/03/11/using-routing-with-webforms.aspx), but that is beside the point really.
Any ideas?
To be honest, I found the answer here to be more useful: Using the greedy route parameter in the middle of a route definition
The blog post linked to in the question was extremely useful: http://www.thecodejunkie.com/2008/11/supporting-complex-route-patterns-with.html
I think it's impossible but you could try work around it using this route:
{categories}/S
Then split the categories using the '/' character yourself.
I made a site where I just fixed it to 1-3 categories by registering 3 routes, but I had to work around a lot of things and wasn't really happy with it afterwards.
EDIT: Using S/{*categories} will catch the categories. You can only use it at the end of the URL.
Exactly what you need(ed)
This is a long time lost shot, but I seem to have exactly what you need. I've written a GreedyRoute class that allows greedy segment anywhere in the URL (at the beginning, in the middle or at the end - which is already supported).
You can read all details on my blog as well as getting the code of this particular class.
The main thing is it supports any of these patterns:
{segment}/{segment}/{*segment}
{segment}/{*segment}/{segment}
{*segment}/{segment}/{segment}
It doesn't support multiple greedy segments though (which is of course possible as well but has some restrictions that should be obeyed in that scenario), but I guess that's a rare example where that could be used.