Skip to main content
22 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 26, 2016 at 16:18 vote accept SuperBiasedMan
Jan 26, 2016 at 16:09 comment added SuperBiasedMan @Octopus I also got that, I assumed it was that providers are more stringent even with outgoing email addresses.
Jan 25, 2016 at 8:59 comment added Ferrybig At least this email checker works with my special XSS checking email code "<script>alert('xss')</script>"@example.com
Jan 23, 2016 at 22:58 answer added ymbirtt timeline score: 12
Jan 23, 2016 at 22:40 comment added Rob Starling In my experience, it's worth asking "why". That is, other than avoiding accidental transcription errors on the part of end users, unless you're actually implementing a MTA, why not just accept any string? Particularly in the case where a user is telling you their own email address, then important "validation" is whether they can receive a secret sent to that address.
Jan 23, 2016 at 21:40 comment added Bergi "I did heavily consult the font of all knowledge, Wikipedia for its summary on the rules." - there's your problem. If implementing something technical, you should always get the official spec - which is RFC 2822 (and the updates to it) for your case.
Jan 23, 2016 at 7:19 answer added Sjoerd Job Postmus timeline score: 7
Jan 22, 2016 at 21:58 comment added Octopus Well I just tried sending an email to somebody(with_a_comment)@gmail.com and my gmail won't even let me send it. It says "somebody" is invalid. The comment is not even mentioned in the error message.
Jan 22, 2016 at 21:37 comment added Connor Clark Does anyone have a good resource on why rules regarding valid email names are so liberal?
Jan 22, 2016 at 20:30 answer added rhino timeline score: 33
Jan 22, 2016 at 19:07 comment added njzk2 you may want to take a look at ex-parrot.com/pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
Jan 22, 2016 at 17:34 comment added hobbs Your handling of comments isn't strictly correct; quoted-string can only contain FWS between the quotes, not CFWS, so anything that looks like a comment inside a quoted-string isn't a comment, and shouldn't be removed. Something similar is true for domain-literals inside square brackets. Neither is likely to have much real-world impact, but if you want to be absolutely correct you might want to think about how to handle that.
Jan 22, 2016 at 15:40 comment added Jörg W Mittag Unfortunately, I couldn't get your code to work (I get an IndentationError), but I suspect that it might fail even on some of the more simple examples from RFC3696.
Jan 22, 2016 at 13:32 answer added Peilonrayz timeline score: 24
Jan 22, 2016 at 13:02 answer added 301_Moved_Permanently timeline score: 17
Jan 22, 2016 at 12:47 answer added Pimgd timeline score: 24
Jan 22, 2016 at 12:23 history tweeted twitter.com/StackCodeReview/status/690510184872067072
Jan 22, 2016 at 12:19 comment added 301_Moved_Permanently Not necessarily. And now that I came to think of it, it seems to make much more sense this way.
Jan 22, 2016 at 12:17 comment added SuperBiasedMan @MathiasEttinger Yeah I thought a pattern of silent acceptance but vocal errors would be more useful for the specificity. Do you think the pattern is unclear or user unfriendly?
Jan 22, 2016 at 12:15 comment added 301_Moved_Permanently Nevermind, try: validate(email); except InvalidEmail: pass seems fine too :)
Jan 22, 2016 at 11:49 history edited SuperBiasedMan CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1 character in body
Jan 22, 2016 at 11:31 history asked SuperBiasedMan CC BY-SA 3.0