On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:05:37 +0100 (BST), Philip Hazel wrote:
[...]
>> rabe@??? \
>> "${if and {
>> {def:h_To:}
>> {match
>> {$h_To:}
>> {\\N^(\"someone@???\" )?<?someone@???>?
$\\N}
>> }
>> } {rabe-lkt} fail
>> }" fFrQ
[...]
>1. You don't really need the def:h_To: condition, because if there is no
>To: header, $h_To: expands to an empty string.
Good hint! That will make the expression somewhat simpler.
>2. Your regex will also match
>
> "someone@???" someone@???
> <someone@???
> someone@???>
>
>but as those are illegal (and should never happen), it doesn't really matter.
Yup, I'm aware of THIS deficiency (and the (non-) implications.) :-)
>3. Perhaps more imporantly, your regex will also match
>
> someone@somewhere+org
>
>etc. For tidiness, it is best to escape the dots.
Right, that's a real bug. Thanks for pointing this out!
>4. Do you care about multiple spaces between the two parts?
Normally not, because my mailer employs exactly a single space, but for
"stableness" I will correct this to read " +"
>5. A slightly more efficient regex would use (?:...) instead of (...) to
>save some work, but it will only be very slightly more efficient.
I was not aware of this construct, I will read the docs and probably change my
stuff accordingly.
Thanks for your great support!
Cheers,
Ralf
--
Sign the EU petition against SPAM: L I N U X .~.
http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/ The Choice /V\
of a GNU /( )\
Generation ^^-^^
