Regular Expressions From Scratch, Part Six: The Insanely Clever Bit

Regular Expressions From Scratch, Part Six: The Insanely Clever Bit

  • Comments 5



Definition 11: a function is a set of pairs, where the second member of each pair is the value associated with the first member by the function. If F is a function { (a1, b1), (a2, b2) } then we might write F(a1) = b1, F(a2) = b2. (Again, we will figure out from context whether parentheses mean function mapping, grouping or a finite sequence.)

Definition 12: Take any alphabet S. The regular expression language generating function for S is a function where the first member of the pair is a string in the regular expression language of S, and the second member is a language in S.

Let's call the function L and the regular expression language R. The pairs in this set go like this.

  • The string Ø is paired with the empty language. Or, in our new notation, L(Ø) = {}
  • The strings in R that are just single members of S are paired with the languages that are just single members of S. For example, if S = {a, b} then L(a) = {a}, L(b) = {b},
  • If x and w are in R then L((xw)) = L(x)L(w)
  • Similarly, L((xw)) = L(x) ∪ L(w)
  • Similarly, L(x*) = L(x)*

OK, let's try it out. What's L(((ab)∪a*))?

= L((ab)) ∪ L(a*)
= L(a)L(b) ∪ L(a*)
= {a}{b} ∪ L(a)*
= {a}{b} ∪ {a}*
= ((ab) ∪ a*)
= {ab, e, a, aa, aaa, aaaa, …}

Hey, wouldja look at that: L(((ab)∪a*)) = ((ab) ∪ a*)

What an amazing coincidence!

Obviously this is no coincidence at all. We have just defined a mapping between regular expressions and the languages which consist of all strings which match those regular expressions, and the mapping is basically "turn the regular expression string into an expression via the obvious substitutions."

Since we have this very strong mapping, I am probably going to become very sloppy about making a distinction between L(((ab)∪a*)) and ((aba*). If I say "the language ((ab)∪a*) what I mean is L(((ab)∪a*)).

Note also that L(((ab)a)) = L((a(ba))) = { {aba}. In general, the concatenation and union operators do not require parens. Therefore, from now on I will also be very sloppy with my parens. Even though aba is not a "real" regular expression by the rules laid out earlier, I will assume that you can mentally transform that back into the well-formed (a(ba)) string.

Let's end off today's descent into the bowels of computer science with a rather obvious definition:

Definition 13: A language K over an alphabet S is called a regular language if and only if there exists a string r in S's regular expression language such that L(r) = K. That is, a language is called a "regular language" if and only if it can be described by a regular expression.

Is every language regular? One would suspect not, given the incredible variety of languages that I mentioned earlier. Actually proving that a nonregular language exists is both amusing and character-building, so we'll do that next.

  • Hey Eric,

    Good series so far. I don't remember exactly how I learned about regular languages, but IIRC it was much more centered around FSM's. Is the connection between that approach and the one you are taking going to become apparent?
  • Wait for it...
  • My theory class went at it from both directions; we defined regular languages, then we talked about FAs, then worked on proving their equivalence.
  • PingBack from
Page 1 of 1 (5 items)