Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re: Re: Re: regex to validate e-mail addresses and phone numbers

by Limbic~Region (Chancellor)
on Feb 10, 2004 at 16:56 UTC ( #327963=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Re: Re: regex to validate e-mail addresses and phone numbers
in thread regex to validate e-mail addresses and phone numbers

makar,
Have you ever heard of an XY problem? It is when someone asks how to do Y when they really want to do X. They ask how to do Y because they believe it is the best way to accomplish X. The people that they ask go through many iterations of "try this", followed by "that won't work because of". I am not suggesting to use something other than Email::Valid if that truly is what is desired. What I am saying that is depending on the circumstance, other solutions may be the way to go.

For instance, say the problem is receiving spam messages from addresses that include % symbols and @ signs. You believe that it isn't a valid email address since you have never seen it before. You use Email::Valid and you find out that it is very valid and is a common trick for open-relays. Hmmmm - what do I do? You create your own regex that says I do not care if this is valid, no legitimate mail I receive uses this syntax so I am going to get rid of it.

Cheers - L~R


Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: regex to validate e-mail addresses and phone numbers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: regex to validate e-mail addresses and phone numbers
by makar (Novice) on Feb 10, 2004 at 17:09 UTC
    Understood, thank you very much.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://327963]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (6)
As of 2015-07-04 09:52 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The top three priorities of my open tasks are (in descending order of likelihood to be worked on) ...









    Results (59 votes), past polls