From 9282647e6ce47d521dc81f01a1813baf2d96a5f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: overlookmotel <557937+overlookmotel@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 12:02:44 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] docs(transformer): comment on RegExp transform for potential
 improvement (#5514)

I think it's correct that we could do better here. Or is there some difference in behavior between `RegExp(...)` and `new RegExp(...)`?
---
 crates/oxc_transformer/src/regexp/mod.rs | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/crates/oxc_transformer/src/regexp/mod.rs b/crates/oxc_transformer/src/regexp/mod.rs
index 8d0b63352d878..53a992bfc555a 100644
--- a/crates/oxc_transformer/src/regexp/mod.rs
+++ b/crates/oxc_transformer/src/regexp/mod.rs
@@ -39,6 +39,10 @@
 //! #### Set notation + properties of strings (`v`)
 //! - @babel/plugin-transform-unicode-sets-regex: <https://babeljs.io/docs/en/babel-plugin-proposal-unicode-sets-regex>
 //! - TC39 Proposal: <https://github.com/tc39/proposal-regexp-set-notation>
+//!
+//! TODO(improve-on-babel): We could convert to plain `RegExp(...)` instead of `new RegExp(...)`.
+//! TODO(improve-on-babel): When flags is empty, we could output `RegExp("(?<=x)")` instead of `RegExp("(?<=x)", "")`.
+//! (actually these would be improvements on ESBuild, not Babel)
 
 use std::borrow::Cow;