VoIP Mailing List Archives

[mcampbellsmith at gmai...]

Hi!

How do I do a NOT equal to in a dialplan expression

Normaly in regex I would use the ! character. This doesn't seem to work in FS..

ie
<condition field="${variable}" expression="!^1">

Shouldn't that match when the variable is not starting with one?

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org

[tculjaga at gmail.com]

it depends of what you are trying to acheave.... one approach is with regex

check this: http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Misc._Dialplan_Tools_regex

you can set a different variable and have it true or false ... than you can compare for false state...


well .. it is up to you ...

T.


On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith <mcampbellsmith@gmail.com (mcampbellsmith@gmail.com)> wrote:

[leon at scarlet-intern...]

Hi,

Negating is done with [^...] in a regex, so 'not 1' is matched with:

/^[^1]$/

If you want to match on a longer sequence, you can do that with
negative lookahead, for example 'not 123' can be matched like this:

/^(?!123$)\d{3}$/

regards,

Leon


On Oct 21, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:

[rupa at rupa.com]

You can also look at using anti-action rather than action after the condition.

condition == if
action == then
anti-action == else

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Mark Campbell-Smith
<mcampbellsmith@gmail.com> wrote:

[msc at freeswitch.org]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Rupa Schomaker <rupa@rupa.com (rupa@rupa.com)> wrote:

[mcampbellsmith at gmai...]

Thanks Guys for your suggestions! Very much appreciated.

The reason I asked was that I want to check if a variable is set or
not. I don't think your suggestions will work because I actually have
to check to see an undefined variable. Any way to do this?

I want to have the same extension for checking digits read from DTMF.
The problem is that the digits are not set to the variable until the
transfer statement, which means I would require 2 extensions. It
will make things simpler if I can have the same extension that reads
the digits and then checks them.

For example:

<extension name="checkdigits">
<condition field="destination_number" expression="^checkdigits$"/>
<!--The next condition should be true if the variable $digits
is not set/undefined -->
<condition field="${digits}" expression="^[^.+]$" />
-----<<<< what should be here to check for undefined variable $digits
?
<action application="read" data="1 10 ivr/ivr-hello.wav
digits 10000 #"/>
<action application="phrase" data="spell,${digits}"/>
<action application="transfer" data="checkdigits digits XML
features"/>
</condition>

<condition field="${pincode}" expression="^${some_variable}$">
< SOME ACTIONS HERE >
</condition>
</extension>

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:44 AM, Michael Collins <msc@freeswitch.org> wrote:

[msc at freeswitch.org]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith <mcampbellsmith@gmail.com (mcampbellsmith@gmail.com)> wrote:

[anthony.minessale at g...]

Like rupa said,
use anti-action?

Remember FreeSWITCH XML dialplan is not a programming language it's a pre-processor routing markup

Se potential use of anti-action below:

 <extension name="checkdigits">
     <condition field="destination_number" expression="^checkdigits$"/>
      <!--The next condition should be true if the variable $digits is not set/undefined -->
       <condition field="${digits}" expression="^[^.+]$" />
--        <action application="read" data="1 10 ivr/ivr-hello.wav digits 10000 #"/>
          <action application="phrase" data="spell,${digits}"/>
          <action application="transfer" data="checkdigits digits XML features"/>
          <anti-action application="set" data="not_true=true"/>
     </condition>

     <condition field="${pincode}" expression="^${some_variable}$">
            < SOME ACTIONS HERE >
     </condition>
 </extension>




On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith <mcampbellsmith@gmail.com (mcampbellsmith@gmail.com)> wrote: