Email address regular expression

I've been using this pattern to verify email addresses:

^([0-9a-z]+)([0-9a-z\.-_]+)@([0-9a-z\.-_]+)\.([0-9a-z]+)

But I've recently discovered that addresses with a dash in them won't
pass this test.

Seems to me they should pass.

What's wrong?

--
Floydian Slip(tm) - "Broadcasting from the dark side of the moon"
Random Precision Productions(tm)
67 Union St. #2D, Winooski, Vt. 05404-1948 USA
Sundays, 7-8 pm - Champ 101.3 FM, Colchester; 102.1 FM, Randolph, Vt.
ccb@floydianslip.com - AIM: RandomPrec - www.floydianslip.com

Craig Bailey wrote:

> I've been using this pattern to verify email addresses:
>
> ^([0-9a-z]+)([0-9a-z\.-_]+)@([0-9a-z\.-_]+)\.([0-9a-z]+)
>
> But I've recently discovered that addresses with a dash in them won't
> pass this test.
>
> Seems to me they should pass.

[A-Z] = All characters from A to Z, maybe a \- might help ?

--
Spam:newsgroup(at)craznar.com@verisign-sux-klj.com
EMail:<0110001100101110011000100111010101110010011 010110
11001010100000001100011011100100110000101111010011 011100
11000010111001000101110011000110110111101101101001 00000>

In article <Qpbgb.138702$bo1.108744@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
"127.0.0.1" <newsgroup(at)craznar.com@verisign-sux-ijlkl.com> wrote:

> Craig Bailey wrote:
>
> > I've been using this pattern to verify email addresses:
> >
> > ^([0-9a-z]+)([0-9a-z\.-_]+)@([0-9a-z\.-_]+)\.([0-9a-z]+)
> >
> > But I've recently discovered that addresses with a dash in them won't
> > pass this test.
> >
> > Seems to me they should pass.
>
> [A-Z] = All characters from A to Z, maybe a \- might help ?

Aaaahhhh. But a dash doesn't need to be escaped, do it? Are you
suggesting a add a dash to the first part of the expression? Like this?

^([0-9a-z-]+)([0-9a-z\.-_]+)@([0-9a-z\.-_]+)\.([0-9a-z]+)

Of course, that would allow someone to start their address with a dash,
which I'm not certain is allowable in real email addresses.

--
Floydian Slip(tm) - "Broadcasting from the dark side of the moon"
Random Precision Productions(tm)
67 Union St. #2D, Winooski, Vt. 05404-1948 USA
Sundays, 7-8 pm - Champ 101.3 FM, Colchester; 102.1 FM, Randolph, Vt.
ccb@floydianslip.com - AIM: RandomPrec - www.floydianslip.com

[ not posted to alt groups ]

Craig Bailey wrote:
> I've been using this pattern to verify email addresses:
>
> ^([0-9a-z]+)([0-9a-z\.-_]+)@([0-9a-z\.-_]+)\.([0-9a-z]+)
>
> But I've recently discovered that addresses with a dash in them won't
> pass this test.
>
> Seems to me they should pass.
>
> What's wrong?

Doesn't [0-9a-z\.-_] mean: 0 to 9 and a to z and dot to underscore?

try [0-9a-z\._-]


HTH

--
I have a spam filter working.
To mail me include "urkxvq" (with or without the quotes)
in the subject line, or your mail will be ruthlessly discarded.

Hello,

On 10/06/2003 07:16 AM, Craig Bailey wrote:
> I've been using this pattern to verify email addresses:
>
> ^([0-9a-z]+)([0-9a-z\.-_]+)@([0-9a-z\.-_]+)\.([0-9a-z]+)
>
> But I've recently discovered that addresses with a dash in them won't
> pass this test.
>
> Seems to me they should pass.
>
> What's wrong?

Character ranges that include - must start with that character. Take a
look here at this e-mail address validation class that comes with a
suitable regular expression besides the server based e-mail verification
methods.

http://www.phpclasses.org/emailvalidation


--

Regards,
Manuel Lemos

Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP
http://www.phpclasses.org/

Pedro wrote:

> Doesn't [0-9a-z\.-_] mean: 0 to 9 and a to z and dot to underscore?

Yep. That's dot to underscore in "ASCII collating sequence". "Dot
to underscore" matches fifty characters in total, including all
uppercase letters, numbers, and a bunch of others -- but not the
hyphen!

> try [0-9a-z\._-]

Or even [\w.-]. ;-)

--
Jock

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 11:56:14 -0300, Manuel Lemos <mlemos@acm.org> wrote:

>Character ranges that include - must start with that character.

Or end with it.

--
Andy Hassall (andy@andyh.co.uk) icq(5747695) (http://www.andyh.co.uk)
Space: disk usage analysis tool (http://www.andyhsoftware.co.uk/space)

Craig Bailey wrote:

> Aaaahhhh. But a dash doesn't need to be escaped, do it?

Not necessarily. But in its current position, yes, because it's
indicating a range. The *hyphen* may only be left unescaped "where
it cannot be interpreted as indicating a range".

> Of course, that would allow someone to start their address with a dash,
> which I'm not certain is allowable in real email addresses.

I am certain it is.

See RFC 2822 for details, especially section 3.4.1.

--
Jock

John Dunlop wrote:
> Or even [\w.-]. ;-)

that will match (in some locales) "josécuña"

ps. hope that gets out ok, in HTML I'd write it as
jos&eacute;cu&ntilde;a

--
I have a spam filter working.
To mail me include "urkxvq" (with or without the quotes)
in the subject line, or your mail will be ruthlessly discarded.

Pedro wrote:

> John Dunlop wrote:
>
> > Or even [\w.-]. ;-)
>
> that will match (in some locales) "josécuña"

Ah. Well spotted! I forgot what the intended use was, and
concentrated on the one part. Thanks.

> ps. hope that gets out ok

It did.

--
Jock