Esa-Matti Suuronen

Feels like limited version of regexp. This is not too bad imo: ``` js 'My name is Ben and I like pie'.match(/My name is ([^ ]+) and I like ([^...

Not totally against this. Feels bit weird thou. We would lose some control over the library in that case. What if we want to modify a method in such way...

Why not just use sha1 or md5?

We should add jQuery style `s.noConflict()`.

But if you can inject code between the libraries you can workaround it like this: ``` html // Copy the s global to _s and allow s to be overridden...

I would not oppose it if it were implemented.

+1

Yeah. It's cool for 3.1.

Yeah, it was in the project root. I'll recheck with the latest version.

Meanwhile here's an user land implementation ```ts import { Runtype } from "runtypes"; function assertRuntype( rt: RT, data: any, ): asserts data is ReturnType { rt.check(data); } ``` example ```ts...