Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wredcoll 239 days ago
Sure, now make it work without having to type "\\w"
1 comments

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}`>

Can't you use tagged literals to do something similar?
Not sure exactly what you mean by "something similar".
The issue is not being able to type actual regexes: /\w+[a-z]$/ becomes something different when enclosed in double quotes.