Phil Pennock <Phil.Pennock@???> probably said:
> On 2000-10-03 at 14:14 -0400, Peter Radcliffe gifted us with:
> > ^(?i)[^@]+@mg[^.]+.my.domain bob@???
> > ^(?i)[^@]+@bp[^.]+.my.domain bob@???
>
> Wouldn't that rewrite <fred@mg@???> to <bob@???> ?
Something with two @ symbols wouldn't be accepted by exim, that would
be no different in practice. Why bother allowing for cases that can't
happen ?
> Yours is probably more efficient than this, but surely:
> ^(?i).+@mg[^@.]+.my.domain bob@???
> ^(?i).+@bp[^@.]+.my.domain bob@???
> is more accurate?
That would allow several other illegal cases, and would be far less
efficient. Don't use .+ or .* if you can help it, be more specific.
P.
--
pir pir@??? pir@???
