On 2009-08-19, Clemens Schwaighofer <clemens_schwaighofer@e-gra.co.jp> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 02:11, Randal L. Schwartz<merlyn@stonehenge.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Andre" == Andre Lopes <lopes80andre@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> Andre> I'm developing a function with some checks, for example... to check if the
>> Andre> e-mail is valid or not.
>>
>> How are you hoping to do this? The regex to validate an email
>> address syntactically is pretty large:
>>
>> http://ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
>>
>> And no, I'm not kidding. If your regex is smaller than that, you aren't
>> validating email... you're validating something "kinda like email".
>
> Just in my opinion, this regex is completely too large. For basic
> validating something like:
>
^[A-Za-z0-9!#$%&'*+-\/=?^_`{|}~][A-Za-z0-9!#$%&'*+-\/=?^_`{|}~\.]{0,63}@[a-zA-Z0-9-]+(\.[a-zA-Z0-9-]{1,})*\.([a-zA-Z]{2,4}){1}$
> works very well
not good: eg:
fails this valid address* : admin@xxxxxxx.museum
accepts this invalid one : you@gmail..com
"musedoma" replaced with several x to protect the innocent from spam
in some contexts email adrresses with no domain part are valid
addresses with [bracketed] mx servers instead of a domain and/or bang
paths are also allowed (but not in common use and often not desirable)
