fix(regex): Correct \q{} disjunction-order example in Character_class

[Ashish-CodeJourney]

Description

Fixes the \q{} example in the "Matching strings" section of the Character class reference page. Replaces the confusing template-literal test string with a plain string literal and a correct sample output, fixes the incorrect equivalence claim about disjunction order, and adds an explanation of why \q{\r\n} can appear at the end of the character class.

Motivation

The original example used a template literal mixing real line breaks with \r/\n escapes, so the commented return value didn't match what the regex actually produces. The explanation that followed was also wrong: it claimed the regex was equivalent to forms like \r|\r\n, but disjunction in a regex is not commutative an engine tries alternatives left to right and stops at the first match, so \r\n must be listed before \r to ever match as a pair. The article also never explained that v-mode character classes try to match the longest operand first, which is the actual reason \q{\r\n} can sit after \r and \n in the class and still match correctly.

Additional details

See the Atom :: CharacterClass case of the CompileAtom syntax-directed operation in the regex spec for how a character class tries to match longer strings first.

Related issues and pull requests

Fixes #44526

[github-actions]

Preview URLs (1 page)

• /en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Regular_expressions/Character_class

[DominoPivot]

Looks good to me! I wasn't sure if an explanation for this behavior should go earlier in the article, but in hindsight I think this is fine. It's a niche enough feature that teaching it by example is probably ideal.

Thanks for making the PR, I haven't contributed since MDN was converted from a wiki and still need to familiarize myself with the process. For future reference, is it typical to propose small changes by only opening a PR without an associated issue?

[Ashish-CodeJourney]

Looks good to me! I wasn't sure if an explanation for this behavior should go earlier in the article, but in hindsight I think this is fine. It's a niche enough feature that teaching it by example is probably ideal.

Thanks for making the PR, I haven't contributed since MDN was converted from a wiki and still need to familiarize myself with the process. For future reference, is it typical to propose small changes by only opening a PR without an associated issue?

For small changes, it's usually fine to contribute without opening an issue first. However, opening one is still recommended so others can understand the motivation behind the proposed change.

[Ashish-CodeJourney]

@Josh-Cena any updates ?