Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re: Yet Another Email Validation question

by sweetblood (Prior)
on Apr 06, 2004 at 15:57 UTC ( [id://342986]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Yet Another Email Validation question
in thread Yet Another Email Validation question

Yes, this looks good. My only problem is I won't be able to get it installed for quite awhile as the company has to do a review prior to installing any modules. This is a lengthy process. This is why I'm opting for a regex method.

Thanks!

  • Comment on Re: Re: Yet Another Email Validation question

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Yet Another Email Validation question
by Abigail-II (Bishop) on Apr 06, 2004 at 19:34 UTC
    The company has to review any newly installed module? Sensible. But what about your code, doesn't that have to be reviewed? What if you just make Email::Valid part of your application? Or just copy and paste the relevant code? How long did your company take to review perl itself?

    Anyway, your regex is just too trivial to take serious. It would fail on every email address I create for registrating at a website. Rejecting email addresses that don't start with a \w character is as useful as rejecting street names that don't start with a vowel. You're rejecting perfectly valid email addresses, and on the other hand, you are accepting anything that starts with a \w character, and contains a @ and a dot. Which would mean you'd accept the text of this posting as a valid address, yet reject "this is valid"@example.com.

    Abigail

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://342986]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (7)
As of 2024-04-19 11:24 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found