REGEX - Select everything before a particular word included the line with Word ?

Neculai I. Fantanaru

hi, guy038. Works just fine !!

thank you very much !

Ashton Watts

I’m hoping you can help as the bits above were really helpful but I still have a bit to do.

I want to delete everything between two points in 47000 html files.

I can insert the points using a simple find an replace so i would be left with;

Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
START-DELETING
delete
delete
delete
delete
delete
STOP-DELETING
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep

Hoping you have the answer.

regards,

guy038

Hello, ashton-watts, and All,

I suppose that all your .html files are in a specific directory. So :

First, I strongly advice you to backup the directory containing all your .html files !
Start Notepad++
Now, open the Replace in Files dialog ( Ctrl + Shift + F )
Type, in the Find what: zone, the regex (?s-i).*\R\KSTART-DELETING.*STOP-DELETING\R
Leave the Replace with: zone EMPTY
Insert *.html in the Filters: zone
Fill the Directory : zone with the absolute path of your specific folder
Finally, click on the Replace in Files button
Click on the Yes button, to confirm replacement

Et voilà :-))

So from the initial text, below :

Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
START-DELETING
delete
delete
delete
delete
delete
STOP-DELETING
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep

you’ll get :

Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep
Want to keep

Important :

It could be useless to insert marks, in order to determine the starting and ending boundary of the range of lines to be deleted. Two possibilities :

The boundaries are easy to isolate, among text around and are unique. In that case, it could replace the generic START-DELETING and STOP-DELETING lines
The boundaries may be literally different but follow a same template. In that case, they can be found with a regex, which would be mixed with my regex above !

So, if it’s not confidential information and if you don’t mind, give us an example of the START-DELETING and STOP-DELETING lines of your .html files ! You could also join one of your files, or part of it, as an attached file, with your mail at my e-mail address :

Thanks, for this additional information !

See you later,

Best Regards

guy038

Ashton Watts

@guy038 Hi goy038,

You are a legend. the regex search string above worked perfectly. I had already inserted the start and stop points so it wasn’t an issue.

Thanks very much for your help.

regards,

blackburn1489

@guy038 Hello! Can u help me, please?

I need to get WORD between another word and part of the WORD word
example

title = WORD_name

After I get WORD, I need to find all WORD in the document

and rename them in WORD_lttz
//
After that I need to repeat all operations. but with another WORD1, WORD2, WORD3 and so on
that placed between “title =” and “_name”

title = WORD1_name

find them in entire document and rename them in WORD1_lttz , WORD2_lttz , WORD3_lttz and so on

guy038

Hello, @blackburn1489, and All,

I took some time to figure out what you exactly wanted to do and I hope that my solution will be close enough to what you need !

OK, let’s suppose that we start with the sample text below :

title = ABC_name
title = DEF_name
title = YZ_name
title = GHI_name
title = JKL_name
title = MNO_name
title = YZ_name
title = ABC_name
title = MNO_name
title = MNO_name
title = PQR_name
title = MNO_name
title = STU_name
title = VWX_name
title = ABC_name
title = YZ_name
title = GHI_name

Note that it contains 3 lines with the string ABC, 2 lines with the string GHI, 4 lines with the string MNO and 3 lines with the string YZ !

Now, let’s imagine that you would change each string ABC, DEF… into new strings, according to the table below :

ABC    ->    ABC111
DEF    ->    DEF-22222
GHI    ->    GHI_GHI
JKL    ->    J
MNO    ->    mno
PQR    ->    000PQR
STU    ->    Test
VWX    ->    99
YZ     ->    Y-Z

Then, using the following regex S/R :

SEARCH (?-i)title\x20=\x20(?:(ABC)|(DEF)|(GHI)|(JKL)|(MNO)|(PQR)|(STU)|(VWX)|(YZ))(?=_name)

REPLACE title = (?1\1111)(?2\2-22222)(?3\3_\3)(?4J)(?5\L\5)(?{6}000\6)(?7Test)(?{8}99)(?9Y-Z)_lttz

would, simultaneously, change any occurrence of these 9 strings, into the new ones, defined in the table above ;-))

So, after clicking on the Replace All button, you would get, at once, the following text :

title = ABC111_lttz_name
title = DEF-22222_lttz_name
title = Y-Z_lttz_name
title = GHI_GHI_lttz_name
title = J_lttz_name
title = mno_lttz_name
title = Y-Z_lttz_name
title = ABC111_lttz_name
title = mno_lttz_name
title = mno_lttz_name
title = 000PQR_lttz_name
title = mno_lttz_name
title = Test_lttz_name
title = 99_lttz_name
title = ABC111_lttz_name
title = Y-Z_lttz_name
title = GHI_GHI_lttz_name

Et voilà !

Notes :

Regarding the search regex :
- First, the (?-i) syntax forces the search to be processed, in a sensitive way ( NON-insensitive )
- Now, the part title\x20=\x20 tries to match the string title =, with a space character, before and after the equal sign
- Then, the (?: syntax starts a non-capturing group
- The part (ABC)|(DEF)|(GHI)|(JKL)|(MNO)|(PQR)|(STU)|(VWX)|(YZ) are, simply, 9 alternatives, corresponding to our 9 strings to be changed. Thus, each of them, between parentheses, is stored as group 1, 2, 3…
- The final part )(?=_name) corresponds to the closing parenthesis of the non-capturing group, followed with a look-ahead structure or condition ( Is there the string _name afterABC, DEF… ? ) which must be true for an overall match
Regarding the replacement regex :
- First, it rewrites the string title = , followed with a space character
- Then any (?#....) syntax, where # represents a digit, is a conditional replacement and all the regex after the #, till the closing parenthesis, is evaluated, if the matched string is stored in group #
- Note that the 9 conditional replacement structures (?1\1111)(?2\2-22222)(?3\3_\3)(?4J)(?5\L\5)(?{6}000\6)(?7Test)(?{8}99)(?9Y-Z) could be placed in any order
- In some of them, we rewrite the searched string, stored in group # , due to the \# escape sequence
- In the conditional replacement (?5\L\5) we, simply, rewrite the upper-case string MNO, in lower-case, because of the \L replacement escape sequence
- Be aware, too, that concerning the groups 6 and 8, their conditional replacements are build with the alternate form (?{#}....). Indeed, we must distinguish between the group number # and the digits, which follows it !. If the braces would have been absent, the regex engine would think that groups 6000 and 899 were concerned :-((
- And finally, of course, it rewrites, in all cases, your ending part, the string _lttz !

Best Regards,

guy038

And Boja

Hi,

I have some E-mails

100km@laufwunder.at
100km@tus-ahrweiler.de
100kmbelves@free.fr
12ahewitt@royalschoolcavan.ie
12lfuller@royalschoolcavan.ie
12oakinlabi@royalschoolcavan.ie
12vkells@royalschoolcavan.ie
13@123.com
13362880852@zj165.com
1573364@mail.ru
1matoo@zoznam.sk
2008.lizhigang@163.com

I Want to delete all words till the @ sorry for my english i have 1 milion e-mails so i want to remove all words till the domain start example:

i want to split them into this:

@laufwunder.at
@tus-ahrweiler.de
@free.fr
@royalschoolcavan.ie
@royalschoolcavan.ie
@royalschoolcavan.ie
@royalschoolcavan.ie
@123.com
@zj165.com
@mail.ru
@zoznam.sk
@163.com

Hope someone understand me what i am trying to say :S

Claudia Frank

@And-Boja

if your real data looks like your posted data then something like

find what:^.*?(?=@)

will do the job. Replace with is empty.
See FAQ for more info on regex.

Cheers
Claudia

Md Abdullah Al Noman

I want to delete everything between two points with 36000 line xml files.
which portion is repeated in files.
I can insert the points using a simple find an replace so i would be left with…
<Middle></Middle>
<WebsiteList></WebsiteList>
<EventList></EventList>
<Note></Note>
<LastName></LastName>
START-DELETING… <Photo>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</Photo>
END-DELETING
<GroupList></GroupList>
<Job></Job>

Hoping you have the answer.

Terry R

Given the example you provided the following would remove all text between and including the START and END-DELETING lines.
Find: (START-DELETING.+\R)(.+\R)+(END-DELETING\R)
Replace: empty string here

So the assumption is that there must be at least 1 line between the 2 identifying lines (START and END), that’s the (.+\R)+ portion of the regex. Also note that the first group (START-DELETING.+\R) includes the .+ as your example also has 3 period characters after it. I’ve included brackets around each sub-portion just so as it makes it a bit easier to segment out and identify what each group is doing. Only the middle group brackets are absolutely necessary, i.e.(.+\R)+.

You say you can/have replaced using a simple find and replace to get the START and END lines in there. With my regex you could replace those portions with the original string you used to find. That would save you 1 or 2 additional steps.

Hope this helps.

Terry

guy038

Hello, @md-abdullah-al-noman, @terry-r and All,

I think, that the following regex S/R, could be used, too :

SEARCH (?s-i)^\h*START-DELETING.+?END-DELETING\R

REPLACE Leave EMPTY

Notes :

First, the (?s-i) modifiers, means that, from now on :
- Any regex dot symbol ( .) will match, absolutely, any single character ( standard ones and EOL ones )
- The search will be processed in a sensitive way ( Non-insensitive ! )
Then, the part ^\h*START-DELETING looks, from beginning of line ( ^ ), for the upper-case string START-DELETING, possibly preceded with some horizontal space characters ( Usual space or tabulation )
At end, the part END-DELETING\R searches for the upper-case string END-DELETING, followed with its line-break character(s)
And the middle part .+? represents the shortest range, of any character, between the two strings START-DELETING and END-DELETING
Finally, as the replacement regex is empty, all the overall match is, simply, deleted

Best regards,

guy038

David Bennett

@guy038 you truly are a legend, I agree with the other poster. You are so deep into notepad++ regex, impressive!
I believe you may also know this - IMHO quite common - case, although I can’t find it described anywhere:

Suppose you have just one large file (wordpress sql database in fact, opened in my favorite editor notepad++) and STRING A and STRING B should always belong together:
FIND ALL INSTANCES OF ANY TEXT across lines
WHERE STRING A sometime later
IS FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER STRING A
INSTEAD OF THE “CLOSING” STRING B

Example: Find all instances where, across lines, there’s the literal string [/social]
and after any kind and number of characters there’s another literal string [/social]
BUT in between the two is nowhere a literal string [social] although it should be because [social] and [/social] belong together.

So basically in the example case, string A and string B always belong together, there must never follow two A’s or two B’s. Always the A string, then the B string. Then again the A string, then the B string. Etc. And so you need to find any “fault”: where A is followed sometime later by another A, instead of first a B string.

Did I explain this well enough?

I am sure none of the above, nor anything else I have found, works because I’ve tried them all. Would you have an idea how to go about this?

guy038

Hello @david-bennett, and All,

Thanks, David You explained your problem very well. So you’re looking for ranges [social].......[/social], where, unfortunately, one boundary;, either [social] or [/social] is missing, aren’t you ?

As a sample, in the text, below, I indicated where the boundary is missing :

...[social].......[/social]..............[/social]........[social]............[social]..........[/social]...
                                 ^                                     ^
                          [social] missing			            [/social] missing

BTW, I, also, assume that your database does NOT contain nested blocks [social].......[/social] as, for instance :

[social]....[social].....[social].....[social].....[/social]....[/social].....[/social]......[social].....[/social]....[/social]...

In that case, a possible regex could be :

SEARCH (?-s)(?<=\[/social\])((?!\[social\]).)+?(?=\[/social\])|(?<=\[social\])((?!\[/social\]).)+?(?=\[social\])

If you apply this regex against the text, below, it select all the zones where a boundary is missing !

...[social].......[/social]..............[/social]........[social]............[social]..........[/social]...
                          >              <                       >            <

Note that :

If the selection is surrounded with two boundaries [social], then, this selection should contain a [/social] ending boundary
If the selection is surrounded with two boundaries [/social], then, this selection should contain a [social] starting boundary

If your text may be split on several lines, use, preferably, this regex, almost identical, which is, also, correct for ONE-line blocks [social].......[/social] !

SEARCH (?s)(?<=\[/social\])((?!\[social\]).)+?(?=\[/social\])|(?<=\[social\])((?!\[/social\]).)+?(?=\[social\])

...[social].......[/social]....
                          >
.....
.....[/social].....
     <
.......
...[social].......[/social]..............[/social]........[social]............[social]..........[/social]...
                          >              <                       >            <
......
...[social]...
          >
....
.....[social]...
     <
.......[/social]...

Notes :

The square brackets need to be escaped with the \ character, as they have a special meaning, in regular expressions
At the beginning, the (?-s) or (?s) modifier determines if the dot meta-character ( . ) represents a single standard character only, or any character
Then the regex engine tries to match one of the two alternatives :
- (?<=\[/social\])((?!\[social\]).)+?(?=\[/social\])
- (?<=\[social\])((?!\[/social\]).)+?(?=\[social\])
The first alternative matches the smallest range of characters ( (....)+? ), surrounded by two strings [/social], due to the look-behind (?<=\[/social\]) and the look-ahead (?=\[/social\])
The second alternative matches the smallest range of characters ( (....)+? ), surrounded by two strings [social], due to the look-behind (?<=\[social\]) and the look-ahead (?=\[social\])
In the first alternative, this range must not contain, at any position, the string [social], due to the negative look-ahead, in the construction (?!\[social\]).
In the second alternative, this range must not contain, at any position, the string [/social], due to the negative look-ahead, in the construction (?!\[/social\]).

Best Regards,

guy038

David Bennett

Hey @guy038, thanks for replying! And hello to every notepad++ user.

So you are suggesting, in words,

match a prefix, here [/social], but exclude it from the capture
capture a group:
— if suffix is absent, here [social]
— and any character, one or more times, but as few as possible
match a suffix, here [/social], but exclude it from the capture

Is that worded right?

Earlier I had tried many variations with the look-behind and look-ahead as well, because this simple construct makes so much sense. And then in between, to exclude captures where [social] appears, like it normally should.
Your group capture notation ((?![social]).)+? however I hadn’t tried, thanks for this new variation in my sortiment, I always used exclusion notations like .?(?![social]) and even tried .?[^([social])] which I think is wrong Regex syntax in Notepad++ too.

Either way, unfortunately your regex too does not find the instance where [/social] follows an [/social] without the corresponding [social] in between.
(“Corresponding” because [social]…[/social] here is a “shortcode” in wordpress, but could be anything in other situations of text processing needs.)

Using your regex in all variations you gave in my notepad++ 7.5.8 highlights the entire text (here a database), ie it has 0 hits.

So I was wondering, could there be, logically, any kind of situation where

notepad++ COUNT [social] has 117 hits
and notepad++ COUNT [/social] has 118 hits
(as it does)
and yet, this would NOT be due to the presumed occurrence of one end-marker, here [/social], missing its corresponding start-marker, here [social]?

Because if, logically, such situation is possible (despite that I myself can’t think of one), then your regex may be working despite that in my particular case it cannot find anything.

Did I explain this puzzle well enough?

Just to clarify, this is not “a notepad++ oddity”, my Expresso Regex sw has 0 hits too with your proposed regex, and with all notations that I had tried earlier.
If any oddity then the oddity must be right within the sql database. But I can’t think of one. Can you or anyone else maybe?

David Bennett

Hey @guy038, thanks for replying! And hello to every notepad++ user.

So you are suggesting, in words,

match a prefix, here [/social], but exclude it from the capture
capture a group:
— if suffix is absent, here [social]
— and any character, one or more times, but as few as possible
match a suffix, here [/social], but exclude it from the capture

Is that worded right?

Earlier I had tried many variations with the look-behind and look-ahead as well, because this simple construct makes so much sense. And then in between, to exclude captures where [social] appears, like it normally should.
Your group capture notation ((?!\[social\]).)+? however I hadn’t tried, thanks for this new variation in my sortiment, I always used exclusion notations like .*?(?!\[social\]) and even tried .*?[^(\[social\])] which I think is wrong Regex syntax in Notepad++ too.

Either way, unfortunately your regex too does not find the instance where [/social] follows an [/social] without the corresponding [social] in between.
(“Corresponding” because [social]…[/social] here is a “shortcode” in wordpress, but could be anything in other situations of text processing needs.)

Using your regex in all variations you gave in my notepad++ 7.5.8 highlights the entire text (here a database), ie it has 0 hits.

So I was wondering, could there be, logically, any kind of situation where

notepad++ COUNT [social] has 117 hits
and notepad++ COUNT [/social] has 118 hits
(as it does)
and yet, this would NOT be due to the presumed occurrence of one end-marker, here [/social], missing its corresponding start-marker, here [social]?

Because if, logically, such situation is possible (despite that I myself can’t think of one), then your regex may be working despite that in my particular case it cannot find anything.

Did I explain this puzzle well enough?

Just to clarify, this is not “a notepad++ oddity”, my Expresso Regex sw has 0 hits too with your proposed regex, and with all notations that I had tried earlier.
If any oddity then the oddity must be right within the sql database. But I can’t think of one. Can you or anyone else maybe?

Edit: I went back up to add some extra characters as this comment software here seems to require ESCAPING (like Regex does), otherwise it shows a DIFFERENT text-to-be-posted (even on the right side WHILE you are writing) than which you input (even WHILE you input it on the left side).
Hopefully now the OUTPUT text matches my INPUT text…
How do YOU more easily get your Regex notations to show up LIKE YOU ENTER THEM? Yours come up in red on grey background?

I am posting this again, because “You are only allowed to edit posts for 180 second(s) after posting”… and then even “As new user you can only post once every 1200 seconds” - lol, such bureaucracy makes even genuine comments like mine needlessly difficult…

guy038

Hi, @david-bennett, and All,

OK, my regex does not match something. Quite disappointing :-(( But I don’t give up !

If you get no result, this means that, either :

My regular expression is not well constructed or my concept, to solve your problem, is erroneous
Some characters in your text, or its general layout, prevents us from obtaining positive results
May be, the two above steps arise together :-((

So, if you don’t mind, and if your data is, both, not confidential nor personal, you could send it ( or part of it ) to me. Here is, below, my e-mail address :

Working with real data is always better and, anyway, Notepad++ is really a Swiss knife ! Thus, no doubt about it ! We will, finally, find an acceptable solution ;-))

Regarding the red on gray background, you can obtain it by wrapping your text between two grave accents ( ` )

For instance

If you write `text in red on gray` => normal text : text in red on gray
If you write *`text in red on gray`* => text in italic : text in red on gray
If you write **`text in red on gray`** => text in Bold : text in red on gray
If you write ***`text in red on gray`*** => text in Bold-Italic : text in red on gray

Refer, also, to the excellent summary of the Markdown syntax, on our forum, below, by @scott-sumner !

https://notepad-plus-plus.org/community/topic/14262/how-to-markdown-code-on-this-forum/4

And this FAQ Desk: post, from @peterjones, will give some additional information :

https://notepad-plus-plus.org/community/topic/15739/faq-desk-request-for-help-without-sufficient-information-to-help-you/1

Best Regards,

guy038

P.S. :

David, it would be particularly interesting if you could send me the part where you got 117 hits for [social] and 118 hits for [/social] !

David Bennett

First, thanks so much for replying! @guy038
Maybe you are an official here (hence why you know so much), either way, much appreciated taking the time!

Second,

“If you get no result, this means that, either :…”

Well no, like I hinted, the reason likely is at my end, lol:

“So I was wondering, could there be, logically, any kind of situation where notepad++ COUNT [social] has 117 hits, and notepad++ COUNT [/social] has 118 hits (as it does), and yet, this would NOT be due to the presumed occurrence of one end-marker, here [/social], missing its corresponding start-marker, here [social]? - Because if, logically, such situation is possible (despite that I myself can’t think of one), then your regex may be working despite that in my particular case it cannot find anything.”

Again, your regex may be working well in other raw texts :-)
So were you, or anyone else, able to think of a “logical” possibility/explanation of the above COUNTS?

Also thanks a lot for your “markdown” explanation and for Scott’s helpful link, I multi-clipboarded it, just have to remember that, the “quote” tip I used above already, you noticed.

Well, posting the raw db publicly certainly is not wise but sending it to you would be no problem I think. I assume you would find, your regex works in general, and maybe even find out, why it doesn’t work here. So I think, for both, it would be good to know, yes. :-)

Presumably, had you found a flaw in my initial assumption (above) you would have raised it, right @guy038 ?

If anyone else finds a flaw in it, shout it out loud, will ya?

guy038

Hi, @david-bennett, and All,

Hum…, not totally sure if I got your message properly, but the N++ COUNT feature always scan the entire current file, even if one or several selections are present and whatever the Wrap around option is set or unset !

Of course, in Normal mode, for instance, the count result may be different if you tick/untick the Match case and/or the Match whole word only options

So, to my mind, if we assume that :

The Match case AND the Match whole word only options are not ticked :
No parameter has been changed, in the Find dialog, between the two COUNT operations ( except for the Find what: zone, of course ! )

=> The count of the presumably well-balanced strings [social] and [/social] should always return identical numbers. If NOT, it, necessarily means that there are, indeed, one or several additional occurrences of one of the boundaries :-((

Cheers,

guy038

David Bennett

the N++ COUNT feature always scan the entire current file, even if one or several selections are present and whatever the Wrap around option is set or unset !

Agreed. No doubt about that. And regardless of options set, both normal and regex search always finds one more [/word] than [word]. I verified it for each potential oddity. ;-)
And yet, your earlier proposed regexes (is that a word?) give 0 hits. In regex search mode, lol.

Did you get the sql raw text I sent to the email you … made public? Did you find out if your suggested regex is working some other way in it?
I know that normally notepad++ regex works, in this and any sql db, because I am using it all the time, successfully. So now you got me curious what your explanation is why your regexes fail in this sql db?

guy038

Hello, @david-bennett, and All,

As planned I got your file, without any trouble and I first renamed it as a simple .txt file

When opened in N++, I, also, deleted your comments at beginning of file. So the first line is – Dumping data for table `wp_posts`

Here are some characteristics of this working file :

Size : 9 048 416 bytes
Lines : 1,761 ( the smallest data line is 237 chars long and the longest is 336936 long ! )
118 occurrences of the string [sociallocker], in that exact case
119 occurrences of the string [/sociallocker], in that exact case

I quickly understood that each line, even a long one, contained only one block [sociallocker]........[/sociallocker] ! ( containing between 208 and 96081 characters )

Then, from above, we can deduce that the file contains :

118 correct blocks ......[sociallocker].....[/sociallocker].........
1 incorrect block ..........................[/sociallocker].........

IMPORTANT : Because of the very long lines of your file, I advice you to not use the Wrap feature ! So, uncheck the View > Word wrap menu option for quick navigation in text and between tabs

Before verifying why my previous regex does not work, it was better to make a simplified regex, which would look for any line containing the string [/sociallocker], but ONLY IF the string [sociallocker] cannot be found from beginning of file, till the [/sociallocker] string. So, I first tried :

SEARCH (?-s)^((?!\[sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[/sociallocker\])

Unfortunately, it wrongly, grabbed all the file contents, due to a general failure of the regex engine !?

I had no chance, either, using a greedy quantifier with the regex, below, which gave identical results

SEARCH (?-s)^((?!\[sociallocker\]).)+(?=\[/sociallocker\])

I, then, had the intuition that using a non-capturing group could be the solution. Hence, the regex :

SEARCH (?-s)^(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[/sociallocker\])

Bingo ! Ax expected, it did match all the contents of line 516, till the [/sociallocker] string ;-))

Strangely, using the greedy syntax, below, it leads to a catastrophic breakdown, too, as above !

SEARCH (?-s)^(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+(?=\[/sociallocker\])

I suppose that it’s due, both, to the needed backtracking steps of the regex engine and to the presence of the look-ahead feature :-((

On reflection, it seemed to me that we could remove the look-ahead, too, as we just want to identify the line without the starting boundary. Hence, the regex below, with a lazy quantifier :

SEARCH (?-s)^(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+?\[/sociallocker\]

Whaooou ! Again, the line 516 is correctly matched ! And, this time, the same regex, with the greedy quantifier, below, works too !

SEARCH (?-s)^(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+\[/sociallocker\]

Here is, below, the general layout of the three lines, 514, 515 and 516

 N°  1234567890...             col 24388                  col 43781     col 43795
                                  v                            v             v
514  (4437,...................... [sociallocker]...............[/sociallocker]...4285 chars.....CRLF
515  INSERT ...368 chars.....CRLF
516  (4441,..........................................................................................[/sociallocker]......CRLF
                                                                                                     ^             ^ 
     1234567890...                                                                              col 55224      column 55238

Before coming back,to the regex of my previous post, let us verify the number of ranges between two ending boundaries [/sociallocker] with the simple regex below :

SEARCH (?s)(?<=\[/sociallocker\]).+?(?=\[/sociallocker\])

We get 118 hits. This is quite logical as we have 119 strings [/sociallocker] => 118 intervals ( which contains between 2,657 and 1,339,177 chars ! )

Remark :

You could tell me : why not just use (?s)\[/sociallocker\].+?\[/sociallocker\], without the two look-arounds ?. Well, it’s not exactly the same as, when the first match occurred, the search process continues from after the present ending boundary, so, unfortunately, it skips one interval, after each match :-((

Well, you remember that, in my previous post, the regex contained two alternatives. Naturally, I thought it was safer to test them , separately :

So, the regex, below, tries to match two starting boundaries [sociallocker], without any ending boundary [/sociallocker], inside :

SEARCH (?s)(?<=\[sociallocker\])(?:(?!\[/sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[sociallocker\])

=> ~ 22 seconds ,later, on my old laptop, it gets no results, as expected ! Rather reassuring, isn’t it ?

Similarly, here is the regex, which tries to match two ending boundaries [/sociallocker], without any starting boundary [sociallocker], inside :

SEARCH (?s)(?<=\[/sociallocker\])(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[/sociallocker\])

=> 12 seconds, later, it did select the line 516, till its alone boundary [/sociallocker] ;-))

Now, it’s time to do the final tests, with the overall regex :

SEARCH (?s)(?<=\[/sociallocker\])(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[/sociallocker\])|(?<=\[sociallocker\])(?:(?!\[/sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[sociallocker\])

But again, one wrong match of all the file contents :-((

If we swap the two alternatives, no chance, either !

SEARCH (?s)(?<=\[sociallocker\])(?:(?!\[/sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[sociallocker\])|(?<=\[/sociallocker\])(?:(?!\[sociallocker\]).)+?(?=\[/sociallocker\])

Remark :

I did additional tests to detect the limit and it happens that these two final regexes, match correctly ONLY IF the size of the file is, roughly, under 5 Mb. Surely, it depends of the RAM amount of your configuration and/or of some flaws in our regex engine !

Anyway, there’s, usually, one/several additional solutions ! For instance, I’m thinking of that simple one :

Copy all your data in a new tab
Mark, with bookmarks, in Normal search, all lines containing the string [/sociallocker]
Use the Search > Bookmark > Remove Unmarked lines => your file is shortened to 119 lines
Mark, with bookmarks, in Normal search, all lines containing the string [sociallocker]
Use, again, the Search > Bookmark > Remove Unmarked lines => your file should, now, contains 1 line, beginning with :
(4441, 1, ‘2014-08-23 11:18:50’, ‘2014-08-23 11:18:50’ : our expected line !
Now, searching, in Regular expression, for the regex ^\(4441,, in your original text, should clearly identify the line 516 :-))

Cheers,

guy038

P.S. :

Looking, again, to your file, I noticed that the starting and ending boundaries are embedded, as below :

[sociallocker]
[/sociallocker]

and, indeed, one complete block [sociallocker] is missing, in line 516