Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It'd be really neat if you put a link to the code you used to generate this! Super cool answer. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 27, 2021 at 21:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AviFS I will do this in a few days; unfortunately, the work depends on some private bugfixes to public code, so people wouldn't be able to reproduce the steps currently. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 28, 2021 at 2:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ Although not the shortest code, I like this one because it's very easy to read and the generation of the code used other code. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 28, 2021 at 10:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ Erratum: the first character count had been incorrectly given as 529. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 28, 2021 at 13:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ Very nice. For the record though, I don't think it is fair to call this 452 bytes instead of 456. Most regex engines don't have an option for implied full-string-match; the only ones I know of that do are Java, Boost, Python, and PCRE2, and most of the wrappers for PCRE2 don't provide access to that functionality (pretty much just its native C interface does). \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 4, 2023 at 0:46