> Your regular expression <.*?> is wrong if you're wanting to match something
> like HTML tags.  Try the following
> <[^>]*> which is saying: "match a '<' character then any other character as
> long as it isn't a '>' followed by a '>'.

    I suppose I could use that work around, but my question now is what happened
to non-greedy quantifiers?  I use them all the time in grep and Perl.

- Chuck


----- Original Message -----
From: "Pickersgill, Simon" <simon.pickersgill@d...>
To: "professional vb" <pro_vb@p...>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 3:32 AM
Subject: [pro_vb] RE: VBScript: Regular Expressions


> Chuck,
>
> Your regular expression <.*?> is wrong if you're wanting to match something
> like HTML tags.  Try the following
> <[^>]*> which is saying: "match a '<' character then any other character as
> long as it isn't a '>' followed by a '>'.
>
> Regards,
>
> Simon Pickersgill
>
>
>
>
> Subject: VBScript: Regular Expressions
> From: "Charles Feduke" <webmaster@r...>
> Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:56:43 -0400
> X-Message-Number: 6
>
>     Allright, I have ran into a problem/inconsistancy.  I am writing
> VBScript
> that utilizes the RegExp object.  On Windows NT 4, the following non-greedy
> expression is legal:
>
> <.*?>
>
> which would match <H1> from <H1><I>test</I></H1> instead of matching the
> entire
> row.  On Windows 2000 however that same exact line generates "Unexpected
> Quantifier".  Being that a "?" is the only way to make it nongreedy, how the
> hell can this (nongreediness in quantifiers) be accomplished on Windows
> 2000?
>
> - Chuck
>
> Please note: This is no ordinary email. It is in perma-mint condition. If
> you
> spill soda on it, the drops fly off harmlessly onto lesser emails.
>
>
>