Is /l{ 12 , }/ just as valid as /l{12,}/?

[icefapper]

Hello
From what I understand from the spec, whitespace is significant in literals; which, to me, means
QuantifierPrefix :: { DecimalDigits , DecimalDigits } in RE's should accept /l{12,}/ but not /l{ 12 , }/; but that is not the behavior of Firefox, for example; it accepts either of the above.

Has the insignificance of whitespace in an RE quantifier been mentioned in the spec? Or is Firefox actually wrong?

[claudepache]

Just tested in Firefox and Safari:

/^a{1, }$/.exec('a') // null
/^a{1, }$/.exec('a{1, }') // ["a{1, }"]

I.e., /^a{1, }$/ is treated the same way as /^a\{1, \}$/. That semantics is already specced in Annex B (hint: ExtendedPatternCharacter does not exclude { nor }).

[claudepache]

Just tested in Firefox and Safari:

/^a{1, }$/.exec('a') // null
/^a{1, }$/.exec('a{1, }') // ["a{1, }"]

I.e., /^a{1, }$/ is treated the same way as /^a\{1, \}$/. That semantics is already specced in Annex B (hint: ExtendedPatternCharacter does not exclude { nor }).

[icefapper]

@claudepache
Thanks for the hint! Looks like it is as you say.

[icefapper]

@claudepache
Thanks for the hint! Looks like it is as you say.

[icefapper]

@claudepache
Please correct me if I'm actually wrong: /a{1, }/ is treated like /a\{1, \}/ because {1, } fails to get parsed as an RE quantifier? I'm asking this because that is what I understand from:

[~U]ExtendedAtom Quantifier
[~U]ExtendedAtom

could I ask if I'm correct?

[icefapper]

@claudepache
Please correct me if I'm actually wrong: /a{1, }/ is treated like /a\{1, \}/ because {1, } fails to get parsed as an RE quantifier? I'm asking this because that is what I understand from:

[~U]ExtendedAtom Quantifier
[~U]ExtendedAtom

could I ask if I'm correct?

[claudepache]

@icefapper You're correct. Under the annex-B semantics, when parsing a RegExp pattern, the order under which the production alternatives are tried is significant.

[claudepache]

@icefapper You're correct. Under the annex-B semantics, when parsing a RegExp pattern, the order under which the production alternatives are tried is significant.

[icefapper]

@claudepache Thanks!
I will leave this issue at your disposal; please close it whenver you find it appropriate.

[icefapper]

@claudepache Thanks!
I will leave this issue at your disposal; please close it whenver you find it appropriate.

[icefapper]

@claudepache Also for the record, Chrome accepts /[\w-e]/ even though I've not come across any matching production for it in the spec.

[icefapper]

@claudepache Also for the record, Chrome accepts /[\w-e]/ even though I've not come across any matching production for it in the spec.