Allen Wirfs-Brock (2015-01-13T21:23:54.000Z)
Would those of you who consider yourselves RegExp experts take a look at https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3519  Is this a bug? If so, what is the fix?

This construction for Identity Escape goes back to Norbert's original proposal http://norbertlindenberg.com/2012/05/ecmascript-supplementary-characters/index.html 

Perhaps we need to add a:
  ClassAttom[U] :: [+U]  \-

production or some such to the pattern grammar.

Allen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150113/2e562935/attachment.html>
d at domenic.me (2015-01-28T19:38:07.390Z)
Would those of you who consider yourselves RegExp experts take a look at https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3519  Is this a bug? If so, what is the fix?

This construction for Identity Escape goes back to [Norbert's original proposal](http://norbertlindenberg.com/2012/05/ecmascript-supplementary-characters/index.html)

Perhaps we need to add a:

```
ClassAttom[U] :: [+U]  \-
```

production or some such to the pattern grammar.
d at domenic.me (2015-01-28T19:37:28.824Z)
Would those of you who consider yourselves RegExp experts take a look at https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3519  Is this a bug? If so, what is the fix?

This construction for Identity Escape goes back to [Norbert's original proposal](http://norbertlindenberg.com/2012/05/ecmascript-supplementary-characters/index.html)

Perhaps we need to add a:

```
  ClassAttom[U] :: [+U]  \-
```

production or some such to the pattern grammar.