MENU
Which one of the following Regular Expressions could be used to parse the value 5.2.0 from the string?
Suggested Answer: D
Get Premium CIS-SM Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
43 comments · newest first
MA
Margery
11 months ago
C is way too simple for this versioning.
TI
Timothy
11 months ago
Wait, can A even work for this? Seems off.
AL
Alison
12 months ago
Not so sure about D, it might not handle leading zeros.
QU
Queenie
12 months ago
Definitely B, it captures the full version format.
SH
Shalon
12 months ago
I think B is the right choice.
IZ
Izetta
1 year ago
I’m not confident, but I feel like option A is too vague to capture the version number correctly.
PA
Paz
1 year ago
I’m leaning towards option B as well, but I wonder if option D could work if it’s just looking for the numbers.
FR
Francine
1 year ago
I remember practicing regex questions, and I feel like option D might be too strict since it doesn't account for the dots between the numbers properly.
LA
Latrice
1 year ago
I think option B looks familiar because it captures the version format with digits and dots, but I'm not entirely sure if it matches exactly.
KE
Keneth
1 year ago
Ah, I see what they're getting at. Option D is the correct answer - "Version (\d+).(\d+).(\d+)" will capture each part of the version number separately. Nice and straightforward.
IZ
Izetta
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I'll need to double-check the syntax for matching a version number with three parts separated by periods. Maybe option D is the way to go?
ME
Melita
1 year ago
I think option B looks the most promising. The regular expression "Version\s+(\d+\.\d+\.\d+)" should be able to capture the version number in the format we're looking for.
LA
Latrice
1 year ago
I'm a little confused by the different options here. I know regular expressions can be tricky, but I think I'll go with option B. The "Version\s+(\d+\.\d+\.\d+)" pattern seems like it should work for parsing out the version number.
BA
Barrett
1 year ago
Okay, I think I've got this. If the aiops-ir-core-archiving pod can't communicate with Kafka topics, it would likely mean that event journal updates can no longer be maintained, so I'm going to go with option A.
CA
Caren
1 year ago
AzCopy could also be a good choice, but I'm not sure if it's the most appropriate for this specific scenario.
HE
Helga
1 year ago
I'm a bit confused, though. I don't recall there being specific details about directors in the report. Is it really option 1?
MA
Maryln
1 year ago
Option F: Version (Hopefully not 1.0.0)
NO
Nobuko
1 year ago
I agree, that regex pattern looks like it would capture the value 5.2.0
BR
Brock
1 year ago
I think the answer is B) Version\s+(\d+\.\d+\.\d+)
JU
Junita
1 year ago
I'm leaning towards Option B. It's concise and covers the typical version number format.
AN
Annabelle
1 year ago
I would go with Option B as well. It seems to be the most reliable option for extracting the version number.
AL
Alysa
1 year ago
I agree, Option B seems like the most specific choice for parsing the version number.
FA
Fanny
1 year ago
I think Option B is the best choice. It looks like it can capture the version number accurately.
VE
Vernice
1 year ago
Option A is too broad. Capturing everything between the dots won't give you the specific version numbers.
EN
Ena
1 year ago
I would go with option B as well, it seems to be the most specific.
JI
Jimmie
1 year ago
I agree, option A is too broad and might capture more than just the version numbers.
HE
Hershel
1 year ago
I think option B) Version\s+(\d+\.\d+\.\d+) would work best.
JO
Jordan
2 years ago
Option D seems a bit overkill. Splitting the version string into three separate capturing groups feels unnecessary for this use case.
LE
Leota
1 year ago
Yeah, option D does seem like it's doing more than what's needed for just parsing the version number.
KR
Krissy
1 year ago
I would go with option B as well, it captures the version number accurately without unnecessary complexity.
SH
Shenika
1 year ago
Agreed, option B seems like the most efficient choice for this task.
LA
Lacresha
1 year ago
I think option B) Version\\s+(\\d+\\.\\d+\\.\\d+) would work best for parsing the value 5.2.0.
MA
Man
2 years ago
But option B captures the specific format of the version number with digits and dots, making it more accurate
CH
Charlene
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is D) Version (\d+).(\d+).(\d+)
MA
Man
2 years ago
I think the answer is B) Version\s+(\d+\.\d+\.\d+)
ES
Esteban
2 years ago
I think Option B looks the most promising. It specifically targets the 'Version' keyword and a pattern of three numbers separated by dots.
AN
Antonio
1 year ago
I think Option B is the correct one as well. It matches the pattern of three numbers separated by dots after the 'Version' keyword.
AU
Audry
1 year ago
I agree, Option B seems to be the most accurate choice.
NO
Norah
1 year ago
I think Option B is the correct Regular Expression to extract the value 5.2.0 from the string.
DA
Danica
1 year ago
I agree, Option B seems like the best choice for parsing the value 5.2.0.
MA
Margot
2 years ago
I'm not sure, but I think D) Version (\d+).(\d+).(\d+) could also work if we want to capture each number separately
HI
Hillary
2 years ago
I agree with Gwenn, because it specifies the exact format of the version number
GW
Gwenn
2 years ago
I think the answer is B) Version\s+(\d+\.\d+\.\d+)