If I have a string like this:
$str = '[tr]Kapadokya[/tr][en]Cappadocia[/en][de]Test[/de]';
I want that
$array = array(
'tr' => 'Kapadokya',
'en' => 'Cappadocia',
'de' => 'Test');
How do I do this?
-
Please keep in mind that the SO-community in general likes to see a bit more effort before asking a question: What did you try to solve the problem? Did you do some basic research? ....VolkerK– VolkerK2015-02-19 10:35:20 +00:00Commented Feb 19, 2015 at 10:35
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
With a few assumptions about the actual syntax of your BBCode-ish string the following (pc) regular expression might suffice.
<?php
$str = '[tr]Kapadokya[/tr][en]Cappadocia[/en][de]Test[/de]';
$pattern = '!
\[
([^\]]+)
\]
(.+)
\[
/
\\1
\]
!x';
/* alternative, probably better expression (see comments)
$pattern = '!
\[ (?# pattern start with a literal [ )
([^\]]+) (?# is followed by one or more characters other than ] - those characters are grouped as subcapture #1, see below )
\] (?# is followed by one literal ] )
( (?# capture all following characters )
[^[]+ (?# as long as not a literal ] is encountered - there must be at least one such character )
)
\[ (?# pattern ends with a literal [ and )
/ (?# literal / )
\1 (?# the same characters as between the opening [...] - that's subcapture #1 )
\] (?# and finally a literal ] )
!x'; // the x modifier allows us to make the pattern easier to read because literal white spaces are ignored
*/
preg_match_all($pattern, $str, $matches);
var_export($matches);
prints
array (
0 =>
array (
0 => '[tr]Kapadokya[/tr]',
1 => '[en]Cappadocia[/en]',
2 => '[de]Test[/de]',
),
1 =>
array (
0 => 'tr',
1 => 'en',
2 => 'de',
),
2 =>
array (
0 => 'Kapadokya',
1 => 'Cappadocia',
2 => 'Test',
),
)
see also: http://docs.php.net/pcre
4 Comments
Casimir et Hippolyte
There is no need to double escape the backreference and you should change
.+ to [^[]+ or at least .+? to limit the backtracking (and if several translations are on the same line).
VolkerK
a) yes, probably; I never would though because I was raised a C-developer where it was (back in those days, sigh :D) an error. But you're right. b) no, I don't want to; that's the liberty I put into "a few assumptions" ;-) But yes, using
[^[]+ can easily be considered better.Casimir et Hippolyte
We have indeed few informations about the exact syntax of this bbcode-like, but it seems to be consecutives translations of the same term, so I assumed, my turn, that these tags can't contain nested tags, but the future is the door to all possible.
VolkerK
And your points are completely valid and therefore incoporated into the answer.
