claude.pache at gmail.com
Mon May 18 22:33:18 UTC 2015
> Le 18 mai 2015 à 23:53, Jason Orendorff <jason.orendorff at gmail.com> a écrit :
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Claude Pache <claude.pache at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Another more powerful approach (which I prefer), [...]
> As long as we prohibit matching groups within lookbehind assertions, I
> think the approach you prefer is a strict superset of what's proposed.
> So there's no opportunity cost to taking the proposal as-is: the .NET
> semantics could be compatibly added later.
> I imagine TC39 gives some preference to proposals that exist in a
> concrete form. So if you prefer the .NET approach enough to do
> anything about it, now's a great time to write some spec text.
>> That said, I think there are easier missing features to be added, that are
>> supported by most other RegExp flavours. I'm thinking of:
>> * the `s`, or `.dotall` flag: the dot `.` matches every character, including
>> * true support of Unicode, namely: escape sequences such as `\Lu` for
>> uppercase letter, or `\X` for grapheme cluster.
> Why not submit proposals for these?
You are right, but procrastination and other activities...
But I'll try to write some more concrete proposals for those ideas.
More information about the es-discuss