Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Clear questions and runnable code
get the best and fastest answer
 
PerlMonks  

comment on

( #3333=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

I've seen domains where foo.com was used in e-mail addresses for employees while foo.net was used in e-mail addresses of customers.

As for the "+mailbox" convention, there are arguments on both sides of whether to ignore such in determining equivalence of addresses (a customer might legitimately want separate accounts for members of a single group where the correspondence for all accounts just go to separate mailboxes at the same address, or it might just be a source of confusion or simplify some mild cases of abuse).

But we'll be using +mailbox to simplify testing so we'll just use lc $addr1 eq lc $addr2 as I already noted.

Thanks for the module recommendations. Email::Address notes:

XXX: This ($phrase) used to just be: my $phrase = qr/$word+/; It was changed to resolve bug 22991, creating a significant slowdown. Given current speed problems. Once 16320 is resolved, this section should be dealt with. -- rjbs, 2006-11-11
XXX: ...and the above solution caused endless problems (never returned) when examining this address, now in a test:
admin+=E6=96=B0=E5=8A=A0=E5=9D=A1_Weblog-- ATAT --test.socialtext.com
So we disallow the hateful CFWS in this context for now. Of modern mail agents, only Apple Web Mail 2.0 is known to produce obs-phrase. -- rjbs, 2006-11-19

which confirms some of my suspicions/assumptions.

Looking at the regexes that the module uses, they appear to have been constructed directly from the RFCs very similarly to how I constructed mine, except fewer features were intentionally dropped.

The note that "Of modern mail agents, only ... is known to produce" leads me to want to use that module if I were trying to parse e-mail addresses received in e-mail messages. An e-mail system would be broken if it required "the hateful CFWS" in order to deliver messages to it. So completely disallowing CFWS (as I did) doesn't prevent any addresses from being used.

The module doesn't appear to provide a way to get the address with quoting and escaping removed so that addresses can be compared. It also doesn't disallow the very common user mistake of "everybody@gmail" (which can be valid as an e-mail address in some situations but isn't a valid address to give to somebody outside of your organization and so is worthwhile for us to disallow).

So it appears that my similar regex has several advantages that I couldn't get from Email::Address as written.

- tye        


In reply to Re^2: Practical e-mail address validation (Email::Address) by tye
in thread Practical e-mail address validation by tye

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":



  • Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
    <code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
  • Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
  • Want more info? How to link or or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.
Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (3)
As of 2021-10-28 09:24 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    My first memorable Perl project was:







    Results (96 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?