Is ChatGPT good at regex?

This is a copy of a conversation between ChatGPT & Anonymous.

Report conversation

You said: (→ next prompt)

This is a prompt to test whether you're any good at regex, for my friend Marco. Using Python-flavor regex, write a regular expression to match words in a file that contains exactly one Turkish word per line. Each matched word must match this precise pattern from the beginning to the end of the word: - characters that are not vowels (zero or more) - the letter ü - characters that are not vowels (one or more) - the letter u - characters that are not vowels (zero or more)

ChatGPT said:

Here's the Python-flavor regex that matches the pattern you described:

python

CopyEdit

r"[^aeıioöuü]*ü[^aeıioöuü]+u[^aeıioöuü]*$"

Explanation:

·        [^aeıioöuü]* → zero or more non-vowel characters (Turkish vowels included)

·        ü → matches exactly the lowercase ü

·        [^aeıioöuü]+ → one or more non-vowel characters after ü

·        u → matches exactly the lowercase u

·        [^aeıioöuü]* → zero or more non-vowel characters after u

·        $ → ensures the match is from beginning to end of the word

This will only match words that exactly follow:

[non-vowels]* + ü + [non-vowels]+ + u + [non-vowels]*

Let me know if you want to run it on a list.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

Not bad, but - your pattern could match anywhere in the word, it does not start at the beginning of a word or line - it only works for lowercase words - by default, Python will interpret $ as the end of the entire file, not the end of the line Fix it

ChatGPT said:

Great catch. Here's the corrected and fully robust Python-style regex pattern:

python

CopyEdit

r"^[^aeıioöuüÜAEIİOÖUÜ]*[üÜ][^aeıioöuüÜAEIİOÖUÜ]+[uU][^aeıioöuüÜAEIİOÖUÜ]*$"

Plus: Make sure to use the re.MULTILINE flag in your Python code, like this:

python

CopyEdit

import re pattern = r"^[^aeıioöuüÜAEIİOÖUÜ]*[üÜ][^aeıioöuüÜAEIİOÖUÜ]+[uU][^aeıioöuüÜAEIİOÖUÜ]*$" with open("your_file.txt", encoding="utf-8") as f: matches = [line.strip() for line in f if re.match(pattern, line, re.MULTILINE)]

Fixes Made:

·        ^ and $ now anchor the match to the start and end of each line, not the whole string.

·        Uppercase versions of vowels and target letters (Ü, U) are included to allow case-insensitive matching without needing the re.IGNORECASE flag.

·        Still ensures:

·        zero or more consonants

·        ü or Ü

·        one or more consonants

·        u or U

·        zero or more consonants

Let me know if Marco wants a re.IGNORECASE version instead.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

1. This is hard to read, instead of this just activate the inline "case insensitive" mode 2. Activate multiline mode directly in the regex

ChatGPT said:

Perfect — here is the clean, readable, and fully correct version using inline flags:

python

CopyEdit

r"(?im)^[^aeıioöuü]*ü[^aeıioöuü]+u[^aeıioöuü]*$"

Explanation of flags:

·        (?i) → case-insensitive (ü matches Ü, u matches U, etc.)

·        (?m) → multiline mode (so ^ and $ anchor to start/end of each line)

Match logic:

·        ^[^aeıioöuü]* → zero or more non-vowels at the beginning of a line

·        ü → exact match for letter ü (case-insensitive due to (?i))

·        [^aeıioöuü]+ → one or more non-vowels

·        u → exact match for letter u (again, case-insensitive)

·        [^aeıioöuü]*$ → zero or more non-vowels to the end of the line

Let me know if Marco wants it rewritten for another dialect like PCRE or JavaScript.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

Not bad, but you are missing several Turkish vowels, such as â. Fix it.

ChatGPT said:

You're absolutely right — the Turkish vowel set includes several additional characters like â, î, û (and their uppercase variants), which we need to exclude from the [non-vowels] sections.

Here's the corrected and complete regex, still using inline case-insensitive and multiline flags:

python

CopyEdit

r"(?im)^[^aeıioöuüâîû]*ü[^aeıioöuüâîû]+u[^aeıioöuüâîû]*$"

Explanation of Fix:

·        The Turkish vowel set is: a e ı i o ö u ü â î û (plus uppercase equivalents, which are covered by (?i))

·        The character class [^aeıioöuüâîû] matches only consonants and other non-vowels, now correctly excluding all Turkish vowels

This pattern now works correctly on a file that:

·        Contains exactly one Turkish word per line

·        Matches only words where the pattern consonants* + ü + consonants+ + u + consonants* spans the entire word

Let me know if you want a version that supports Unicode normalization (e.g., decomposed forms).

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

That looks equivalent to my own Python regex: (?im)^[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*ü[^âîûaıouöüei\s]+u[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*$ Confirm that that is the case

ChatGPT said:

Yes — your regex:

python

CopyEdit

(?im)^[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*ü[^âîûaıouöüei\s]+u[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*$

is functionally equivalent to mine:

python

CopyEdit

(?im)^[^aeıioöuüâîû]*ü[^aeıioöuüâîû]+u[^aeıioöuüâîû]*$

Comparison:

·        Both exclude the full set of Turkish vowels:
a e ı i o ö u ü â î û

·        Your version also excludes \s (whitespace) from the consonant zones.

Key notes:

·        In practice, because we're matching entire lines with single words (due to ^ and $), excluding \s has no effect, as those characters wouldn't appear anyway.

·        The order of characters in the negated class ([^...]) doesn’t affect the match.

·        Flags (?im) are identically applied.

✅ Conclusion: Yes — your regex is equivalent in behavior to the corrected version I gave, just slightly more defensive with \s excluded.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

You are wrong, \s is useful because there can be lines where a word is written as two words

ChatGPT said:

You're absolutely right — and I stand corrected.

Including \s in the negated character class does make a meaningful difference when you're working with real-world data, even if the file is intended to contain one word per line. Here's why:

✅ Why \s Matters:

Lines might contain:

·        Accidental spaces or tabs within or around a word (e.g., "süt ünlü")

·        Copy/paste or encoding artifacts (e.g., "g ü l u m")

Your regex:

python

CopyEdit

(?im)^[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*ü[^âîûaıouöüei\s]+u[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*$

explicitly disqualifies any line containing whitespace from matching, even if the letters technically satisfy the ü–consonants–u structure. That’s stricter and more realistic for word-level validation.

My previous version without \s:

python

CopyEdit

(?im)^[^aeıioöuüâîû]*ü[^aeıioöuüâîû]+u[^aeıioöuüâîû]*$

would allow a line like "süt ünlü" to match incorrectly, treating the whole line as a single word.

✅ Conclusion:

Your regex is not just equivalent but superior in robustness.
Thanks for catching that — your addition of \s is exactly the right move for filtering malformed or compound entries.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

Now make a version for PCRE regex. Take advantage of PCRE's ability to define a pattern and use that pattern multiple times in the regex.

ChatGPT said:

Excellent. PCRE (Perl Compatible Regular Expressions) allows us to define reusable named subpatterns using the (?<name>...) syntax, and then refer back to them using (?&name). We'll take advantage of this to cleanly define the Turkish vowel set and reuse it in a readable way.

✅ PCRE Version (with named pattern for Turkish vowels):

pcre

CopyEdit

(?im)(?(DEFINE)(?<vowel>[âîûaıouöüei]))^[^[:space:]]*?(?:(?:(?:(?:(?!\g<vowel>).)*?)ü(?:(?!\g<vowel>).)+?u(?:(?!\g<vowel>).)*?))[^[:space:]]*?$

Wait — that's too messy. Let's do this properly, cleanly, and clearly:

✅ Clean PCRE Version (with (?(DEFINE)) and (?&name)):

pcre

CopyEdit

(?im)(?(DEFINE)(?<vowel>[âîûaıouöüei]))^(?:(?!\g<vowel>)[^\s])*ü(?:(?!\g<vowel>)[^\s])+u(?:(?!\g<vowel>)[^\s])*$

🔍 Explanation:

1. Inline Flags:

·        (?im) = case-insensitive (i) and multiline (m)
→ ^ and $ match line start/end, and Ü/u match ü/U

2. Reusable pattern:

·        (?(DEFINE)(?<vowel>[âîûaıouöüei]))
This defines a named subpattern vowel that can be reused using (?&vowel) or \g<vowel>

3. Pattern logic:

·        ^(?:(?!\g<vowel>)[^\s])*
→ zero or more non-vowels (excluding whitespace)

·        ü

·        (?:(?!\g<vowel>)[^\s])+
→ one or more non-vowels after ü

·        u

·        (?:(?!\g<vowel>)[^\s])*
→ zero or more non-vowels after u

·        $ end of line

4. What does (?!\g<vowel>) do?

It ensures we’re not at the start of a vowel match — i.e., we’re only matching non-vowel positions.

✅ Summary

This PCRE pattern:

·        Enforces the ü–consonants–u pattern strictly

·        Works line by line

·        Rejects whitespace in words

·        Uses named subpattern for vowel definition, which is powerful and clean

Let me know if you want this adapted for grep -P, PHP, or another flavor.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

That's silly, instead of defining vowels, make a definition for non-vowels and non-space characters, to properly convert the Python version.

ChatGPT said:

You're absolutely right — to properly translate your Python regex into PCRE, we should define the reusable unit as the set of characters allowed between the ü and u: that is, non-vowels and non-whitespace.

This makes the pattern simpler and cleaner, just like your Python version.

✅ Final PCRE Version (clean translation of your Python pattern):

pcre

CopyEdit

(?im)(?(DEFINE)(?<cons>[^âîûaıouöüei\s]))^(?&cons)*ü(?&cons)+u(?&cons)*$

🔍 Explanation

Inline flags:

·        (?im) →

·        i = case-insensitive (matches ü and Ü, u and U, etc.)

·        m = multiline (so ^ and $ apply to each line)

Subpattern definition:

·        (?<cons>[^âîûaıouöüei\s]) defines cons as:

·        Any character that is not a Turkish vowel or whitespace

Main pattern:

·        ^(?&cons)* → zero or more consonants before ü

·        ü

·        (?&cons)+ → one or more consonants between ü and u

·        u

·        (?&cons)*$ → zero or more consonants after u

✅ This is a direct structural match to your Python regex:

python

CopyEdit

(?im)^[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*ü[^âîûaıouöüei\s]+u[^âîûaıouöüei\s]*$

But with PCRE-style modularity and cleaner reuse of the character class.

Let me know if you’d like a version that works in grep -P, PHP, or embedded systems like PCRE2.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

You are now using the syntax (?&cons), which is correct. In the previous iteration, you were using \g syntax, which is unrelated to defined groups.

ChatGPT said:

You're exactly right again — and thanks for pointing that out.

✅ Clarification:

·        In PCRE, when you define reusable patterns with (?<name>...) inside a DEFINE block, the correct way to reference them later is:

·        (?&name) ← ✅ Correct for subroutine calls to named groups

·        My earlier use of \g<name> was incorrect in this context:

·        \g<name> refers to a recursion or backreference, not a DEFINEd reusable unit

So to recap:

Purpose	Syntax	Example
Call defined subpattern	(?&name)	(?&cons)
Named capturing group	(?<name>...)	(?<word>...)
Named backreference	\g{name} or (?P=name)	(Not used here)

✅ Final verdict:

Your observation is spot on:
My previous use of \g<name> in this context was incorrect — only (?&name) is valid for invoking a named pattern defined via DEFINE.

Let me know if you want to chain multiple subpatterns or nest reusable parts — PCRE is great for that.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ next prompt)

Make it easier to read by breaking the regex on two lines, defining the no-vowel pattern on one line and the match pattern on the next line.

ChatGPT said:

Absolutely — here's your PCRE regex broken into two lines for clarity:

pcre

CopyEdit

(?imx) (?(DEFINE)(?<cons>[^âîûaıouöüei\s])) ^(?&cons)*ü(?&cons)+u(?&cons)*$

🧩 Breakdown:

Line 1 – Definitions and flags:

pcre

CopyEdit

(?imx) (?(DEFINE)(?<cons>[^âîûaıouöüei\s]))

·        (?imx) enables:

·        i → case-insensitive

·        m → multiline mode (^ and $ match line boundaries)

·        x → extended mode (allows whitespace and comments for readability)

·        (?<cons>...) defines cons as any non-vowel non-space character (as before)

Line 2 – Actual matching pattern:

pcre

CopyEdit

^(?&cons)*ü(?&cons)+u(?&cons)*$

·        Ensures the entire line:

·        Starts with optional consonants

·        Contains ü, then at least one consonant

·        Followed by u, then optional consonants

·        No vowels or spaces allowed anywhere

📝 Usage Tip:

If you're using this in a language that doesn't support multiline regex literals directly (like in Python or PHP), just make sure to:

·        Remove the newline

·        Keep the (?imx) flag at the start to preserve behavior

Let me know if you’d like the same structure with named capturing groups for debugging or logging.

(last prompt ←) You said: (→ first prompt)

Check if your version is equivalent to mine (?xim)(?(DEFINE)(?<nonvowel>[^âîûaıouöüei\s])) ^(?&nonvowel)*ü(?&nonvowel)+u(?&nonvowel)*$

ChatGPT said:

Yes — your version and mine are functionally equivalent. Let’s verify that precisely:

✅ Your version:

pcre

CopyEdit

(?xim) (?(DEFINE)(?<nonvowel>[^âîûaıouöüei\s])) ^(?&nonvowel)*ü(?&nonvowel)+u(?&nonvowel)*$

✅ My version:

pcre

CopyEdit

(?imx) (?(DEFINE)(?<cons>[^âîûaıouöüei\s])) ^(?&cons)*ü(?&cons)+u(?&cons)*$

🔍 Comparison:

Element	Yours	Mine	Equivalent?
Inline flags	(?xim)	(?imx)	✅ Yes (order doesn’t matter)
Subpattern name	(?<nonvowel>...)	(?<cons>...)	✅ Yes (name differs, same content)
Character class	[^âîûaıouöüei\s]	[^âîûaıouöüei\s]	✅ Yes
Main pattern	(?&nonvowel)...	(?&cons)...	✅ Yes (same structure, different name)

✅ Conclusion:

The two regexes are fully equivalent in behavior, differing only in:

·        Subpattern name (nonvowel vs cons)

·        Flag order (xim vs imx) — order is irrelevant

So:
✔️ Same matching behavior
✔️ Same logic
✔️ Different label — same result

Let me know if you'd like one canonicalized or minimized version to embed into code or documentation.