actually it looks to be like a better place to put it is: ClassEscape[U] :: [+U] -
allen On Jan 19, 2015, at 9:45 PM, Norbert Lindenberg wrote: > I think the change proposed by Allen is fine. The main point of the new > definition of IdentityEscape is to reserve \p, \X, and other escape sequences > involving ASCII letters, to which we may want to assign different > interpretations in the future. Allowing \- does not conflict with this. > > Norbert > > >> On Jan 14, 2015, at 0:20 , Mathias Bynens <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On 13 Jan 2015, at 22:23, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Would those of you who consider yourselves RegExp experts take a look at >>> https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3519 Is this a bug? If so, >>> what is the fix? >>> >>> This construction for Identity Escape goes back to Norbert's original >>> proposal >>> http://norbertlindenberg.com/2012/05/ecmascript-supplementary-characters/index.html >>> >>> >>> Perhaps we need to add a: >>> ClassAttom[U] :: [+U] \- >>> >>> production or some such to the pattern grammar. >> >> I think it’s a bug — see >> https://codereview.chromium.org/788043005/diff/220001/src/parser.cc#newcode4354 >> for the discussion that led to this report. >> >> Your change would allow developers to use an escaped `-` in a character >> class, e.g. `/[a-f\-A-Z]/u`, rather than having to move it to the beginning >> (i.e. `/[-a-fA-Z]/u` or end (`/[a-fA-Z-]/u`) of the character class, as is >> possible today without the `u` flag. That is a good thing IMHO. >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
