Wow, that's really cool. I can't wait to read the paper. Have y'all written anything else about it?
> For example, when we can prove that a regex R subsumes a regex T, then an alternation R|T can be rewritten to just R, since T is already included in it.
This doesn't compose though, right? For example, if you have `sam|samwise`, then you can do that transformation, but if you have `\b(?:sam|samwise)\b` then you can't.
> but a larger class of patterns get to stay in the DFA world with derivatives.
> For example, when we can prove that a regex R subsumes a regex T, then an alternation R|T can be rewritten to just R, since T is already included in it.
This doesn't compose though, right? For example, if you have `sam|samwise`, then you can do that transformation, but if you have `\b(?:sam|samwise)\b` then you can't.
> but a larger class of patterns get to stay in the DFA world with derivatives.
Can you say more about this?