Best approach to utilize RamDisk for Chrome?

Question

I am currently using regex: /^\d+$/ to do numeric only field validation, but I have a need to extend this if possible with the following rules:

Only 7 numeric characters OR 13 numeric characters

Examples:

• Pass: 1234567
• Pass: 1234567890123
• Fail: 12345678
• Fail: 12345678901234
• Fail: 12@45!78901234
• Fail: 12@45!78
• Fail: 123

Solution

In general, the virtual memory subsystem and filesystem of your OS are smarter than you about how to allocate and use physical memory (especially for filesystem buffer caching). By devoting a chunk of RAM to a ramdisk, you are reducing the amount of RAM available to your OS by dedicating it to one single purpose. If you take too much RAM away from your OS, you will experience general performance degradation caused by low availability of RAM, though the application(s) that use the ramdisk may perform better. This is a trade-off you have to make.

Comments

[Admin]

Relevant: stackoverflow.com/questions/13874777/regex-exactly-n-or-m-ti‌​mes.

[j riv]

I understand this general note of wisdom but there is a situation one would need to bypass the Operating System: A very quirky hard disk that isn't of importance to be replaced but it does create problems the OS does not detect (for example parking its heads excessively and its power options being quirky, not allowing disabling it, even if its data is secure).

[Admin]

@Restuta No, actually I did not downvote it. Actually I like that solution. Maybe someone else downvoted it during the period when it was missing the ^ and $. It's not unreasonable to downvote wrong answers, and not everyone then reverses their vote when the problem is fixed. BTW have now cleaned up the comment stream.

[Restuta]

agree, not sure why you think it's wrong when it's missing ^ and $. Like you said this is not the place to write exact regexes, that's why I prefixed it with "something like" and not "do exactly this"

[Admin]

@indramurari Actually, it does provide an answer to the question. Why would say that it does not?

[Nikhil]

@torazaburo It shoud be comment. If it is an answer it should have very good explanation to it that why it will work as you have done it in your answer

[Mritunjay]

@indramurari well, What I thought it's a really simple regexp. And the no ways I think it's just a comment.

[BernardV]

Your solutions seems to work perfectly thanks Mritunjay!

[BernardV]

Thank you for the detailed explanation @torazaburo

[Admin]

@indramurari I agree that the answer could definitely use more explanation, but the lack of such explanation in and of itself does not mean that this "does not provide an answer to the question". If you don't like the lack of explanation, then down-vote it, but don't flag as "not an answer".