3 ms·

Sure, now make it work without having to type "\\w"

• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• ssalbdivad 1y ago
  Yes, there are limits on what string literals can precisely represent, but we've tried to be pragmatic about trade offs around clarity, concision and performance. Subexpressions like `\\w` or `[a-Z]` would just be inferred as `${string}`, but that doesn't mean the inference won't be useful. For example: expression: regex("^\\w+@\\w+\\.\\w+$") type: Regex<`${string}@${string}.${string}`>
  • wredcoll 1y ago
    Can't you use tagged literals to do something similar?
    • ssalbdivad 1y ago
      Not sure exactly what you mean by "something similar".
      • wredcoll 1y ago
        The issue is not being able to type actual regexes: /\w+[a-z]$/ becomes something different when enclosed in double quotes.