I am glad to see a spec for .NET-style look-behinds. I am hoping it is
considered by those who are familiar with the ECMAScript specification.
As a third option, introducing \K being available in recent versions of
Perl might be worth considering. This expression excludes what the
preceding
I realize that this is nit-picky, but the name `RequireObjectCoercible` feels
wrong (and not intention-revealing) in the following context (which is not
about objects at all):
1. Let O be ? RequireObjectCoercible(`this` value).
2. Let S be ? ToString(O).
Something like `RequireActualValue` or
This is great stuff, thanks for doing this.
I couldn't see any bugs in it, though I must admit that 21.2.2.4 part 4
made my head hurt, so I skipped it.
Just to prove I actually read it, I'll point out that independant is
spelled independent,
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Claude Pache
Thank you for telling us that news. Until any proposal (Claude's, mine,
or anyone else's) for look-behind assertions reaches Stage 4, I leave my
proposal at that URL.
Nozomu
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 08:58:13 +, Gorkem Yakin wrote:
> Lookbehind assertions were discussed at the TC39 meeting last
Lookbehind assertions were discussed at the TC39 meeting last week and the
committee is in favor of the .NET-style version.
Gorkem
From: es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Erik Corry
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 11:22 AM
To: Nozomu Katō
5 matches
Mail list logo