fix : issue #2430 isNumeric doesn't support scientific notation

[ShreySinha02]

#2430 fix(isNumeric): Add support for scientific notation

This PR addresses the issue described in issue #2430, where the isNumeric function did not support scientific notation. The regular expression used in isNumeric was updated to correctly validate numeric strings in scientific notation formats, such as '2e+21' and '-3.5E-8'. This change ensures that isNumeric can handle a wider range of numeric formats and provides more accurate validation.

References

Issue: validator.js issue isNumeric doesn't support scientific notation #2430

Checklist

• [x] PR contains only changes related; no stray files, etc.
• [ ] README updated (where applicable)
• [x] Tests written (where applicable)
• [ ] References provided in PR (where applicable)

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 99.96%. Comparing base (f81d857) to head (4e616a4). Report is 8 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##            master    #2447      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   100.00%   99.96%   -0.04%     
===========================================
  Files          110      111       +1     
  Lines         2510     2518       +8     
  Branches       633      635       +2     
===========================================
+ Hits          2510     2517       +7     
- Partials         0        1       +1     

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[pano9000]

IMHO, the scientifc notation should probably be an option. If I use isNumeric in a everyday type of situation, I would expect it to not accept any types of letters, but just numbers.

if we merge this, then numbers like "2E+G", which an everyday user would not recognize as a "useful" number", would return "true", which could maybe lead to confusion.

so I would rather tend to say -> make this an opt-in option, so that people who really need this can use it, and keep the default behaviour as is.

I would like to here additional opions on this though, maybe @WikiRik @profnandaa ?

What we probably should do either way is add a line about JS turning those huge numbers into these scientific notation type of numbers into the README, to make people aware about this edge case

[WikiRik]

Yes, agree about having it an opt-in option. No need to change defaults and introduce a breaking change

[ShreySinha02]

@pano9000 @WikiRik Thanks for the feedback, everyone! I agree with the idea of making scientific notation support an opt-in option to avoid breaking the existing behavior and to ensure clarity for everyday use cases.

so should I work on updating the PR to include this as an optional feature. I'll add an argument, something like { allowScientific: true }, which users can enable if they need to validate scientific notation.