exactBinding isn't so exact

[owenmead]

Like the idea of exact binding, but my impression is that it would bind exactly

Say I have the following binding:
{{ data_source.model.volts|number:2 }}

I would expect to use either "volts" or the whole binding expression.

Problem is that I also have:
{{ data_source.model.volts_average|number:2 }}

Since exactBinding uses the following regex it matches both volts and volts_average
var matcher = new RegExp('([^a-zA-Z\\d]|$)' + binding + '([^a-zA-Z\\d]|^)');

Thinking the following would make the most sense
by.binding - Using the simple contains search (also doesn't break anything)
by.exactBinding - Matches the whole binding, including the filter etc
by.regExBinding - Pass in a regular expression to match against

Be happy to send a pull request if others think this is a good idea

[juliemr]

@hankduan what do you think about including . and _ as characters for exact binding to test against?

[hankduan]

I feel like having three locators for binding is excessive, but even if we include . and _ into by.exactBinding, people can use all sorts of special characters (-,$,@, etc). We can also say exactBinding needs to be exact until whitespace and | too.

var matcher = new RegExp('(\s|$|\|)' + binding + '(\s^|\|)');

[juliemr]

+1 for it needing to be exact up until whitespace or a |.

[owenmead]

+1 for exact being exact up until the first | It's much easier to explain and document
"Matches binding exactly. Does not include filters as part of match."

My suggestion for the regEx option was to provide a bit more flexibility, but you are probably right that just exact and contains is enough. At least until someone comes up with a use case to need the regEx.

[hankduan]

merged with f9082d0