Armel Asselin wrote:

though, there are a few inconsistencies though with the ECMAScript spec. 1. it seems that re-matching an atom does not first clear its sub-matches, as "step 4" in page 135 of ECMA 262 3rd edition tells to.

that is, it does what is in the 'and not' part here:

/(z)((a+)?(b+)?(c))*/.exec("zaacbbbcac") which returns the array ["zaacbbbcac", "z", "ac", "a", undefined, "c"] and not ["zaacbbbcac", "z", "ac", "a", "bbb", "c"]

I'll look into it.

2. the {n,m} notation should not accept spaces in ECMAScript mode (though it's practical, it's not conformant). I easily admit that its not really important.

I regard that as a compatible extension :-) I do remember that allowing spaces was a deliberate policy, but whether for compatibility with Perl or POSIX I don't recall. Thanks for the feedback, John.