Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: support for modifier #83

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Oct 27, 2024
Merged

feat: support for modifier #83

merged 9 commits into from
Oct 27, 2024

Conversation

ota-meshi
Copy link
Member

@ota-meshi ota-meshi commented Apr 27, 2023

I was working on an experimental implementation of the RegExp Modifiers. I'm not sure yet if this implementation can be merged as-is, but I'm opening a PR to share my AST ideas as well.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-regexp-modifiers

@RunDevelopment
Copy link

A bit of feedback from my first impression of the AST (I haven't looked at the parser implementation yet):

  1. Group#modifiers: Modifiers | null: When is modifiers null? Is it null when modifiers are impossible (legacy regexes) or when there are no modifiers (e.g. /(?:foo)/u)? What about /(?-:foo)/u?
  2. Modifiers#add and Modifiers#remove: What does null mean for them? Can both be null? If null means "no flags", then why not have a ModifierFlags with all flags set to false?

@ota-meshi
Copy link
Member Author

ota-meshi commented Oct 25, 2023

Thank you for your comment!

Group#modifiers: Modifiers | null: When is modifiers null? Is it null when modifiers are impossible (legacy regexes) or when there are no modifiers (e.g. /(?:foo)/u)? What about /(?-:foo)/u?

Regexps without modifiers will be null. For example, modifiers of (?:x) is null. (?-:x) will result in a parsing error.

Modifiers#add and Modifiers#remove: What does null mean for them? Can both be null? If null means "no flags", then why not have a ModifierFlags with all flags set to false?

I thought that nodes with no width should be avoided, but after re-checking it, it seems that nodes with no width already exist the nodes generated by regexpp. For example, a Flags node without flags has no width.
For consistency, it seems necessary to set a ModifierFlags node that sets all flags to false, as you say. I will make that change later.

@RunDevelopment
Copy link

Regexps without modifiers will be null. For example, modifiers of (?:x) is null.

I see, makes sense.

(?-:x) will result in a parsing error.

Ah, my bad. I only looked at the grammar itself and not its early errors.

@ota-meshi ota-meshi marked this pull request as ready for review October 11, 2024 01:20
@ota-meshi ota-meshi linked an issue Oct 11, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@MichaelDeBoey MichaelDeBoey added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 11, 2024
@ota-meshi
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you for reviewing this PR.
The PR I opened for Acorn was also merged, so this one should be fine too. I will merge this PR.

@ota-meshi ota-meshi merged commit 347b151 into main Oct 27, 2024
16 checks passed
@ota-meshi ota-meshi deleted the modifiers branch October 27, 2024 11:39
@ota-meshi ota-meshi restored the modifiers branch October 27, 2024 11:39
@ota-meshi ota-meshi deleted the modifiers branch October 27, 2024 11:39
Copy link

🎉 This PR is included in version 4.12.0 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request released
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add support for RegExp Modifiers
3 participants