I'm confused. Doesn't Yishay's example use syntax that Harbs claimed
threw an error?
Anyway, I can believe the three steps Harbs listed are correct for JS
since step 1 might just happen via implicit type coercion. I suppose
someone could test it by seeing if JS handles "new RegExp({})";
But since there are differences between SWF and JS I want to first make
sure we have agreement that the goal here is to be backward compatible
with SWF if we can. I don't think we should be requiring folks to modify
existing passing of strings or getting the compiler to try to modify those
strings if we can figure out how to get match() in JS to be equivalent to
SWF's match().
So I think Herbs suggested wrapping in try catch like this, correct?
public function match(input:String, pattern:*):Array
{
COMPILE::SWF
{
return input.match(pattern);
}
COMPILE::JS
{
try
{
return input.match(pattern);
}
catch (e:Error)
{
pattern = pattern.toString();
if (input.indexOf(pattern) != -1)
return [ pattern ]; // or whatever should be returned
return null;
}
}
}
I don't think we should use trace to tell folks not to use String. You
are welcome to add it to the ASDoc though.
-Alex
On 7/20/17, 10:52 AM, "yishayw" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I think there would still be a difference between flash and js because the
>flash implementation (counter to AS3 documentation) always returns null
>when
>an invalid regex is passed as a string. So according to your suggested
>implementation for
>
>Var s: String = "m?o";
>Var a:Array = s.match("?")
>
>a is null in flash but ["?"] in JS.
>
>
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-fle
>x-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com%2FFlexJS-String-match-tp63392p63467.ht
>ml&data=02%7C01%7C%7C381f79bbe2594b1cab0808d4cf9af1a0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794
>aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636361711762211281&sdata=gA2I9N%2Bq%2F%2FvILp7C3c
>UQHenXZDXmu0lK3PtJ%2FnhetW4%3D&reserved=0
>Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
