I did want to point out that .split does not know how to use an array of strings as separators. Your example works because any object passed as a first argument to .split is converted to a string first. As it happens, the stringified form of [' '] is ' ', so this works, but as soon as you add a second element to the array, you would get very different results -- for example, ['a', 'b'] stringifies to the three-character delimiter 'a,b'.
A few other bug fixes:
the chickens-to-ducks example doesn't actually show the replacement in its output
the .split example with a regex incorrectly escapes the \d, which isn't necessary in a regex literal (but would be needed in a string argument to the new RegExp constructor)
^ this is actually a very interesting use of a regex split, because normally the sequence captured by the regex is not included in the output array. However, because you use capture-group parentheses in your regex -- (\d) instead of \d -- the capture-group sequence is spliced into the output array.
A thorough overview!
I did want to point out that
.splitdoes not know how to use an array of strings as separators. Your example works because any object passed as a first argument to.splitis converted to a string first. As it happens, the stringified form of[' ']is' ', so this works, but as soon as you add a second element to the array, you would get very different results -- for example,['a', 'b']stringifies to the three-character delimiter'a,b'.A few other bug fixes:
.splitexample with a regex incorrectly escapes the\d, which isn't necessary in a regex literal (but would be needed in a string argument to thenew RegExpconstructor)^ this is actually a very interesting use of a regex split, because normally the sequence captured by the regex is not included in the output array. However, because you use capture-group parentheses in your regex --
(\d)instead of\d-- the capture-group sequence is spliced into the output array.Thanks for looking at the examples.
I'll check them later.