Anonymous Monk has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

I'm trying to validate an emailaddress contained in $emailaddress.

I am trying to make sure that it contains at least @(text or numbers).(text or numbers)

I have been trying the following without success 

$emailcheck=0;
$_=$emailaddress;
if ( !/\@([a-z][A-Z][0-9]\.+)([0-9][a-z][A-Z]+)/ ) { $emailcheck++; }

[download]

Does anyone have any ideas ?

Edit: 2001-03-03 by neshura

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: validate an email address ?
by arturo (Vicar) on Feb 16, 2001 at 21:15 UTC

    If you want decent validation, try Email::Valid.

    If you want your code to be readable, please wrap it in <code> tags.

    Now, to the immediate problem: is this cut and pasted? Your regex (as posted) is attempting to find things that *DON'T* match your pattern, i.e. $emailcheck will only be incremented if the address isn't in the format you've specified. While we're at it, here's the syntax for checking $emailaddress directly, with a little of Perl's syntactic neatness thrown in: 

    $emailcheck++ if $emailaddress =~ /@[a-z0-9]+\.[a-z0-9]+/i;

    [download]

    HTH

    Philosophy can be made out of anything. Or less -- Jerry A. Fodor

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      there's also RFC822 if email valid doesn't work.

      And doesn't japhy's OGRE have a "real" 822 validating regexp for a test case? a regexp that's, oh, 500 lines long?

[reply]
        The version of Email::Valid on my machine (0.12) uses the RFC822 pattern.
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
Re: validate an email address ?
by chipmunk (Parson) on Feb 16, 2001 at 21:32 UTC
[reply]
Re: validate an email address ?
by batmonk (Scribe) on Feb 16, 2001 at 21:52 UTC
[reply]
Re: validate an email address ?
by Gloom (Monk) on Feb 16, 2001 at 21:16 UTC 
    if( $emailaddress =~ m!\@[.a-zA-Z0-9]+\.[a-zA-Z0-9]+$! ) {
$emailcheck++
}

    [download]

    But it's too simple to really check an email address..

    Update

    I only tried to answer simply to the question and adviced him to look for a more serious solution
    ___________________
    Hope this helps
[reply]
[d/l]
      This is wrong, for all the normal reasons. {grin} Please search the wealth of info available on this topic already, or even the other messages likely to pop up on this thread alone!

      -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

[reply]
        Amen.
[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Back to Seekers of Perl Wisdom