mirror of
https://github.com/ascribe/onion.git
synced 2024-06-16 17:43:17 +02:00
74a587906b
And Tim thought this was going to be a piece of cake… next time he can play with the url regex.
57 lines
2.3 KiB
JavaScript
57 lines
2.3 KiB
JavaScript
'use strict'
|
|
|
|
// TODO: Create Unittests that test all functions
|
|
|
|
// We return new regexes everytime as opposed to using a constant regex because
|
|
// regexes with the global flag maintain internal iterators that can cause problems:
|
|
// http://bjorn.tipling.com/state-and-regular-expressions-in-javascript
|
|
// http://www.2ality.com/2013/08/regexp-g.html
|
|
export function getEmailRegex() {
|
|
// This is a bit of a weak test for an email, but you really can't win them all
|
|
// http://stackoverflow.com/questions/201323/using-a-regular-expression-to-validate-an-email-address
|
|
return /.*@.*\..*/g;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function getLinkRegex() {
|
|
// You really can't win them all with urls too (unless a 500 character regex that adheres
|
|
// to a strict interpretation of urls sounds like fun!)
|
|
// https://mathiasbynens.be/demo/url-regex
|
|
//
|
|
// This was initially based off of the one angular uses for its linky
|
|
// (https://github.com/angular/angular.js/blob/master/src/ngSanitize/filter/linky.js)...
|
|
// but then it evovled into its own thing to support capturing groups for filtering the
|
|
// hostname and other technically valid urls.
|
|
//
|
|
// Capturing groups:
|
|
// 1. URL scheme
|
|
// 2. URL without scheme
|
|
// 3. Host name
|
|
// 4. Path
|
|
// 5. Fragment
|
|
//
|
|
// Passes most tests of https://mathiasbynens.be/demo/url-regex, but provides a few false
|
|
// positives for some tests that are too strict (like `foo.com`). There are a few other
|
|
// false positives, such as `http://www.foo.bar./` but c'mon, that one's not my fault.
|
|
// I'd argue we would want to match that as a link anyway.
|
|
//
|
|
// Note: This also catches emails, as otherwise it would match the `ascribe.io` in `hi@ascribe.io`,
|
|
// producing (what I think is) more surprising behaviour than the alternative.
|
|
return /\b(https?:\/\/)?((?:www\.)?((?:[^\s.,;()\/]+\.)+[^\s$_!*()$&.,;=?+\/\#]+)((?:\/|\?|\/\?)[^\s#^`{}<>?"\[\]\/\|]+)*\/?(#[^\s#%^`{}<>?"\[\]\/\|]*)?)/g;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* @param {string} string String to check
|
|
* @return {boolean} Whether string is an email or not
|
|
*/
|
|
export function isEmail(string) {
|
|
return !!string && string.match(getEmailRegex());
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* @param {string} string String to check
|
|
* @return {boolean} Whether string is an link or not
|
|
*/
|
|
export function isLink(string) {
|
|
return !!string && string.match(getLinkRegex());
|
|
}
|