- From: Steve Webster <steve@dynamicflash.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 01:25:47 +0000
Hi folks, Firstly, this is my first post to this list and I'm not sure if I'm violating any kind of list etiquette by just posting straight out. I'm just a meager web developer, so I'm not even sure that I have any right to be commenting on this specification, but I thought I'd give it a go. I'm concerned about the implicit start-of- and end-of-string anchors that are to be applied to a pattern. While I appreciate that the majority of use cases would likely require exact user input matching, I would argue that developers could not reasonably anticipate that these anchors would be applied. Indeed, I can think of no other implementation of regular expressions that operates in this way, and I fear that this will only serve to confuse developers already familiar with other regular expression implementations. It could also be argued that developers who might use such an advanced feature are likely to also have good knowledge of (and be using patterns in conjunction with) ECMAScript and its regular expressions, which do not work in the same way as the proposed pattern attribute would. I feel that the justification given in the specification for these implicit anchors - chiefly that it is easier to pick up an error in your pattern when anchors are implicitly added - is a little optimistic. It means that the regular expression you see in the source code is no longer a true representation of what will be fed to the regular expression engine, and without prior knowledge that these anchors are implicitly added (and with no realistic hope of browser debug information on how it parsed the pattern) many developers would be left confused as to why their regular expression works in ECMAScript but not in their web form. As I said at the start, this is my first post to this list, so please be gentle with me :o) Cheers, Steve
Received on Sunday, 12 December 2004 17:25:47 UTC