Seems to be working fine so far, i will keep testing for more combinations and shall update this thread if i encounter an issue
many thanks for your help
Seems to be working fine so far, i will keep testing for more combinations and shall update this thread if i encounter an issue
many thanks for your help
Hi there,
It’ll work fine for the conditions we have specified.
It just seemed a little hacky to me, so I wondered if there was a more elegant way of doing it.
^(?:\+(?!0)|00)[1-9]\d{10,15}$
Seems fine to me apart from I think (?!0) is redundant now? So:
^(?:\+|00)[1-9]\d{10,15}$
Oh yeah, good one.
That was there to make sure that the plus was not followed by a zero, which after the latest modification it won’t be anyway.
or:
^(?:\+|00)(?!0)\d{11,16}$
Yup, that’s much easier to read.
Hi
Anything wrong in the following?
^(?:\+|00)[1-9][0-9]{10,15}$
No, not really.
You should however be aware that writing \d, is the same as writing [0-9].
means \d is faster than [0-9] ?
Nope, just more concise.
Hi Again
I am using the following regex:
/^(?:\\+|00)[1-9][0-9]{10,15}$/
But it does not validate the following two numbers, any idea why?
005374152368
+4865718575
Thanks
Your original post says the numbers should be between 11 - 16 chars (length excluding + and 00). These numbers are only 10 chars.