Regex Match Formula
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
There is a formula being applied on my data - REGEX_Match(ToString([INN]), "-?[0-9]+") the developer is no more with my company and i belive this formula highlits the records where there is any number in the field and i have a vleu - "THIAMINE (VITAMIN B1)" under this B1 there is 1 number available still it does not validated this formula which is correct for my need but i am not sure how this works?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Overall, the formula is checking whether the string representation of the value in the [INN] field contains a valid integer pattern. If there is a match, it will return true, indicating that the value is a valid integer; otherwise, it will return false.
-?: This part of the pattern allows for an optional minus sign at the beginning of the string, indicating a negative number.
[0-9]+: This part of the pattern matches one or more digits (0 to 9).
With the example value you provided, I'd say the ToString([INN]) part is not necessary, as the value provided is already a string.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Your regex should match that value. I see it as unmatched in my designer - which is wrong. I edited this to:
REGEX_Match(ToString([INN]), ".*-*\d+.*")
which did correctly tag this value.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
@SagarGite, the original formula will validate data only when the whole [INN] value looks like an integer. If you want to validate all [INN] that contains an integer, use the formula provided by @apathetichell.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
@sergejs_kutkovics that was my initial take - but regex101 says otherwise...
