this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
908 points (97.8% liked)

Science Memes

11542 readers
1689 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
908
gatekeeping (mander.xyz)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
93 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Stupidmanager 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

[0-9]*\.?[0-9]*

edit: ok no empty strings [0-9]+\.?[0-9]*

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That regex implies “” is a number

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

If I had a nickel for every time that happened I'd have "" nickels.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I didn't realize '.' is a number.

\([0-9]+\.[0-9]\)?[0-9]* is more accurate I think.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't quite understand yours, why does it need parentheses? And requires the decimal point?

how about [0-9]+\.?[0-9]*

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The parens in my regex group part of the regex, so the following '?' makes the entire group optional.

Your regex matches (for example) '5.' as a number.

Mine is also slightly wrong, it matches a blank string as a number. Here's a better one:

[0-9]+\(\.[0-9]+\)?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your regex matches (for example) '5.' as a number

Yeah that's on purpose. That's often used in sciences to mark significant digits.

The thing I'm confused by in yours is you're escaping the parenthesis, so there need to be literal parenthesis in the matching number, or that's what it showed in the regex checker.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Whether or not you need to escape parens depends on the regex implementation.

[–] lemmington_steele 3 points 1 year ago

yeah but by Cantor's diagonal argument, you still wouldn't be listing all the real numbers

[–] Stupidmanager 3 points 1 year ago

well sure, if you want to be fancy. i was speaking in layman terms for the rest of the world.

regex for the win.

[–] Mithre 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What about imaginary numbers?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

[0-9]+\.?[0-9]*[ij]?

I'm not making one for mixed numbers

[–] wafflez 1 points 1 year ago

Zero's not real