TheBigRoomXXL@leminal.space to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 4 days agoEveryone knows what an email address is, right? (Quiz)e-mail.wtfexternal-linkmessage-square153fedilinkarrow-up1887arrow-down18
arrow-up1879arrow-down1external-linkEveryone knows what an email address is, right? (Quiz)e-mail.wtfTheBigRoomXXL@leminal.space to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 4 days agomessage-square153fedilink
minus-squareChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·3 days agoWhat kind of “light validation”? I’m guessing a .*@.* regex match.
minus-squareTomasEkeli@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up13·edit-23 days agoAlmost correct. ^.+@.+$ Too hard to validate properly to be worth it. Even if it is technically valid that’s insufficient. It must also work, and the easiest way to test that is to use it and verify that the user got what we sent.
minus-squareTomasEkeli@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·3 days agoif i can email them and the user gets it - fine by me
minus-squareTomasEkeli@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·3 days agoWould pass first validation, but fail when we try to send an email. Successfully failed.
What kind of “light validation”? I’m guessing a
.*@.*regex match.Almost correct. ^.+@.+$
Too hard to validate properly to be worth it. Even if it is technically valid that’s insufficient. It must also work, and the easiest way to test that is to use it and verify that the user got what we sent.
I see you accept lemmy handles.
if i can email them and the user gets it - fine by me
@@@Would pass first validation, but fail when we try to send an email.
Successfully failed.
@matches