Please note that RegExp.$1 is not part of the spec. The implementation in
V8 is done in a way to mirror .Net as much as possible. Ignoring .Captures
property that has no equivalent in Javascript, capturing the left-most
sub-match inside a lookbehind is what .Net does.
Yang
Note that this can possibly complicate the parser as additional effort is
required to distinguish it from conditional expression.
From: zenpars...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:08:21 +
Subject: Re: Specifying the Existential Operator using Abrupt Completion
To: claude.pa...@gmail.com;
I'm not even sure why RegExp.$1 is mentioned here. The submatches can be
observed just fine as part of the match result. And I don't think it's a
"gotcha" if it's reflected in the spec. And it is in the current draft
afaict.
Yang
___
es-discuss mailing
FWIF `RegExp.$1` and others are de-facto standard and removing them would
break the Web and much more.
I'm not sure how these would affect a lookbehind proposal but I these
cannot be exclude from the list of possible gotchas.
Best Regards
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Yang Guo
Yeah, sorry for the noise but this part confused me too
> Please note that RegExp.$1 is not part of the spec
All good then, Regards.
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Yang Guo wrote:
> I'm not even sure why RegExp.$1 is mentioned here. The submatches can be
> observed just
5 matches
Mail list logo