Re: Isnumeric function?
От | Thomas Swan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Isnumeric function? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 413FB8C0.4050008@idigx.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Isnumeric function? (Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: Isnumeric function?
|
Список | pgsql-sql |
Oliver Elphick wrote: >On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 18:48, Josh Berkus wrote: > > >>Theo, Oliver, >> >> >> >>>Any reason why you don't like ~ '^([0-9]?)+\.?[0-9]*$' ? >>> >>> >>Yes, because it also matches "." , which is not a valid numeric value. >> >> >> >>> ~ '^([0-9]+|[0-9]+\\.[0-9]*|[0-9]*\\.[0-9]+)$' >>> >>> >>Ah, the brute force approach ;-) >> >> > >Nothing like using a nice big hammer! > > > Would "^([0-9]+\\.{0,1}[0-9]*|\\.[0-9]+)$" be a little cleaner? >>Actually, the above could be written: >> >>~ '^([0-9]+)|([0-9]*\\.[0-9]+)$' >> >> > >But that doesn't allow a trailing decimal point. > > > >>... though that still seems inelegant to me. Is there a regex expert in the >>house? >> >> > >All the elegant approaches I can think of match the empty string. There >must be at least one digit and 0 or 1 decimal point with no other >characters permitted. If you use this as a constraint, you could make >it elegant and combine it with another constraint to exclude '' and '.'. > >
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: