Conversation
glennsl
force-pushed
the
feat/syntax/regex-literals
branch
from
ad00e77 to
c42ce97
Compare
|
I think it might be worth adding an attribute to the expression not to incorrectly print escaped regexp as an unescaped one |
glennsl
force-pushed
the
feat/syntax/regex-literals
branch
from
c42ce97 to
69a3237
Compare
I`m not sure I follow. Can you give an example? |
|
Tests passing! 🥳 I'm sure the code quality could be improved, and we could add validation of the internal regex syntax either before or after merging this. |
|
@glennsl Could you add a CHANGELOG entry? @IwanKaramazow Good to go? |
|
@cknitt I'll do one last pass over the next few days to see if there aren't any edge cases. |
Ping @IwanKaramazow 🙂 |
|
Ah, yes, will do a review this weekend! |
|
@IwanKaramazow Ping again. 🙂 |
|
Yes, sorry, I have some time off next week. Will get to this. |
glennsl
force-pushed
the
feat/syntax/regex-literals
branch
from
69a3237 to
f4823dc
Compare
to be fixed later
necessary to pass syntax roundtrip test since printing has changed
glennsl
force-pushed
the
feat/syntax/regex-literals
branch
from
f4823dc to
1051f47
Compare
|
Rebased and added changelog |
|
@glennsl As @IwanKaramazow does not seem to be available for review: Good to go from your point of view? Then I'll merge and we can always refine things in follow-up PRs if necessary. |
|
Yea, sorry about this. The work looks good in general 👍 |
4 participants
This adds syntax for regex literals equivalent to the literal syntax in JavaScript. It is effectively just syntax sugar for the %re syntax extension, but opens up the additional possibility of checking the regex syntax during compilation.
The syntax looks like:
which is equivalent to:
and compiles to:
Closes #6287