Unfortunately, RegExr does not color-code the different capturing groups.<p>For example, replace the RegExr sample regex with "([A-Z])\w+\s\w(\d.\d)" and compare[1][2] its color coding capability to the other regex helpers.<p>The other sites such as regex101.com & debuggex.com will delineate the capture groups within the matched text using different colors. This is very helpful for complex captures because making the boundaries visible can reveal bugs in your thinking of what substrings the regex is actually capturing.<p>(I don't intend to be negative. If capture group color-coding is an easy coding enhancement for RegExr, consider my comments as mentioning a minor nit.)<p>[1]<a href="https://regex101.com/r/eB5jY1/1" rel="nofollow">https://regex101.com/r/eB5jY1/1</a><p>[2]<a href="https://www.debuggex.com/r/mci3WLNmHGTEatf6" rel="nofollow">https://www.debuggex.com/r/mci3WLNmHGTEatf6</a><p>(couldn't find a way to enable /g global on debuggex.com (even tried PCRE option) but color boundaries still show up on the 1st capture group)
Nice work :) Looks like this tool puts the emphasis on the pedagogical aspect.<p>For development, the most fantastic tool that I know of in this space is debuggex. Here is an example with roman numbers:<p><a href="https://www.debuggex.com/r/Xqlv3QcAuw_EgPSM" rel="nofollow">https://www.debuggex.com/r/Xqlv3QcAuw_EgPSM</a>
My favourite is still <a href="https://regex101.com" rel="nofollow">https://regex101.com</a><p>Example regex: <a href="https://regex101.com/r/wY0rM7/1" rel="nofollow">https://regex101.com/r/wY0rM7/1</a>
I had the older version bookmarked <a href="http://gskinner.com/RegExr/" rel="nofollow">http://gskinner.com/RegExr/</a> which now redirects to this site. Some other good sites that I've used are:<p><a href="http://regviz.org/" rel="nofollow">http://regviz.org/</a><p><a href="https://regex101.com/" rel="nofollow">https://regex101.com/</a><p><a href="http://osteele.com/tools/rework/" rel="nofollow">http://osteele.com/tools/rework/</a><p><a href="http://www.rexv.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.rexv.org/</a><p><a href="https://www.debuggex.com/" rel="nofollow">https://www.debuggex.com/</a>
I have been a regular user of this website for quite some time now. I like the UI and usability is great.<p>Also, <a href="https://regex101.com" rel="nofollow">https://regex101.com</a> is very good alternative
My favorite tool for quick regex definition to text extraction is <a href="http://txt2re.com/" rel="nofollow">http://txt2re.com/</a><p>Paste a sample line, mark the parts you like, it generates a piece of code to extract just those parts. Has saved me hours.
RegExr is my go to regular expression playground. I've been using it for many years, back when it was on <a href="http://gskinner.com/RegExr" rel="nofollow">http://gskinner.com/RegExr</a><p>It's evolved a lot since then :)
For anybody doing .NET development, RegexHero (<a href="http://regexhero.net/tester" rel="nofollow">http://regexhero.net/tester</a>) is nice. It uses Silverlight though...
Will be bookmarked alongside my other regex helpers.<p>One of my other favourites: <a href="https://jex.im/regulex" rel="nofollow">https://jex.im/regulex</a> , a regex visualizer.
I've been programming for about two decades. I had composed three regexes before my first coffee and before seeing this article this morning. My problem: I <i>still</i> don't have a good mnemonic to remember how magic differs grep, egrep, vim, awk, Perl, Python, etc. If that this site had modes and flavoured cheat-sheets I would live there!
Sorry if this information is visible somewhere: Which dialect of regexp does RegExr "do?"<p>In the past, when I've looked for a good Internet RegEx test site, I've had trouble finding one that "does" the Java dialect.
What I am missing is some kind of service to convert between different types of regexes. Like Java, Intellij Idea Search&Replace, vim, less, grep, egrep, sed. There are subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) differences between them which I always forgetting and have to trial&error a bit.<p>I wish there would be one single standard to regexes. Great tool but difficult to use because of many incompatible implementations.
I've been using RegExr for years, it's the first place I go to when I have a tricky regular expression to put together. It works really well.
My favorite is regulex[1] a visual explanation of regex<p>[1] <a href="https://jex.im/regulex" rel="nofollow">https://jex.im/regulex</a>
Suggestion: allow use of extended regexps too (I have a quick JS function to enable this, which you can regard as public domain: <a href="http://blog.mackerron.com/2010/08/08/extended-multi-line-js-regexps/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.mackerron.com/2010/08/08/extended-multi-line-js-...</a>).
Sites like this is great and all, but I wish they included some commonly used regexes. Like a list of 'good' regexs to validate phone numbers, emails and other common stuff.<p>It would actually be pretty cool to have a site like this except you could add the regex to a list, and then people could upvote the regexe depending on the quality of it.
I've been looking for something like this on mac since I moved away from windows long time ago, no RegEx Buddy, such a great tool too. I think that I discovered regexr a year ago. This is such a great tool. Much appreciated work from @gskinner and community.
I've tried a number of these and this is the one I've gotten along with best:<p><a href="http://jsregex.com/" rel="nofollow">http://jsregex.com/</a><p>Simple, minimalist, takes up all available space in the viewport & also works offline if you save the page.
I really like the regexp syntax coloring. What makes me still reach out for rubular.com, is actually the regexp cheat sheet on the bottom of the page. After 25 years, I still like to have a cheat sheet for regexp to remember all the swithces etc.
Probably my favorite tool on the internet. One thing I wish it had was an implicit select option like grep -o since I frequently find myself using it to do interactive text manipulations for one offs.