Closed
Bug 348642
Opened 18 years ago
Closed 15 years ago
Implement JS_*RegExp API
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Core
JavaScript Engine
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WONTFIX
Future
People
(Reporter: WeirdAl, Unassigned)
References
Details
Spun off of bug 106590. We need a complete public JS API for ECMAScript regular expressions.
Use case: Bug 345512 needs ECMA-262 regexp's for its pattern attribute.
Blocks: 354886
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•18 years ago
|
||
requesting blocking1.9: this is a missing part of the public API for JavaScript Engine, and blocks two features of the Web Forms 2.0 implementation, among other things.
Flags: blocking1.9?
Comment 2•17 years ago
|
||
Brendan, any thoughts on how easy/hard this might be?
Comment 3•17 years ago
|
||
Shawn: It's pretty easy, it just keeps falling to the bottom of my list. If you want it, please take it. I'll help wherever I can.
-- crowder
Comment 4•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #3)
> Shawn: It's pretty easy, it just keeps falling to the bottom of my list. If
> you want it, please take it. I'll help wherever I can.
Sadly, I don't have the cycles. We are just looking this for better unicode support for mozStorage.
Should the Target Milestone be changed; we are almost at alpha 9...
Updated•17 years ago
|
Target Milestone: mozilla1.9alpha1 → Future
Comment 6•17 years ago
|
||
If bug 345512 blocks 1.9, then this should too, of course. Until then, it should not.
Flags: blocking1.9? → blocking1.9-
Comment 7•17 years ago
|
||
The problem right now is that jsregexp.c is tightly (whether for good or ill) coupled to the rest of the JSAPI machinery; it needs and uses a JSContext, and takes as input and yields as output JS things. Given that coupling, I don't think there's a huge difference between having a lower-level C API for this, and you simply implementing your requirements using JS_(Compile|Evaluate)Script() calls. Also, I think this bug isn't worth fixing in the 1.9 timeframe; with Tamarin on the horizon, we'll have something PCRE-like to use, then, for more direct C/C++ love.
I'd suggest WONTFIXing this and removing the dependency for 345512. I'll walk you through integrating the APIs you need for that there, if you like.
Comment 8•16 years ago
|
||
crowder - is comment 7 still valid in the new world of tracing? This wold come in handy (or a C api) for bug 391750 as well.
Comment 9•16 years ago
|
||
No, no PCRE for us, seemingly.... but you can still use the regular JS API to get ECMA regexp behavior as I suggested.
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•15 years ago
|
||
per comment 7, and also per developments in bug 345624.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Except the tamarin plan has changed right? So the PCRE-like thing is unlikely to appear.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•