Zafar Khaja

Unfortunately it was made so intentionally. [Here](https://github.com/zafarkhaja/jsemver/issues/1#issuecomment-81959605) is the final grammar and [here](https://github.com/mojombo/semver/issues/113#issuecomment-28774958) is my motivation behind it. However, I'm planning to cover the whole node-semver grammar in future releases...

@yuchi it wasn't supposed to be fully compatible with `node-semver`. I have previously accepted a change introducing some compatibility but that's because those changes didn't break any existing grammar rules....

It's not about amount of code you'll add, it's about complexity you'll bring making the code less readable and maintainable. If you can do that without complicating the parser then...

Hi @Kubuxu, thank you for the report. I know it's not used, it's there just for the sake of [Parser.parse(String input)](https://github.com/zafarkhaja/jsemver/blob/master/src/main/java/com/github/zafarkhaja/semver/Parser.java#L42) signature compatibility to correctly implement the method. It felt...

Sorry for the delay. Of course, I'll do so as soon as possible unless you want to submit a pull request.

A better solution would be not to use exceptions for flow control. Instead you could use `lookahead()` method on the `chars` stream to check for the `EOI` token, something along...

This is sort of a duplicate of the issue #15. I'll be providing the feature with the next release.

`1.0.0-b10 < 1.0.0-b9` This is the intended behavior because alphanumeric pre-release identifiers are compared lexically. Please refer to p.11 of the SemVer 2 for the comparison rules > ... Precedence...

Sounds interesting but I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean. Could you please provide an example? I'm planning to do something which I think might be similar to...

Sorry for the delay Larry and thank you for using `jsemver` and taking your time to contribute. I believe that what you propose is pretty much doable. The good news...