Finding @ in a string, and other items

[Picture Dots]

Ok - I want to check a string for @ in it (Im checking to see if a string
that should contain an email holds a @ )

How would I go about this? preg_match? ereg? strstr?Examples ?

Also - how would I find any non alpha numeric characters in a string so I
can give the user an error message. I dont want any characters besides
alpha-numeric in the strings.

[Chung Leong]

It's easiest to use regexp to deal with this sort of thing.
preg_match('/^[\w\.]+@\w+\.\w+/', $address) should do the trick.

Uzytkownik "Picture Dots" <we*******@brim stonedragons.co m> napisal w
wiadomosci news:HQ******** *********@fe1.c olumbus.rr.com. ..

Ok - I want to check a string for @ in it (Im checking to see if a string
that should contain an email holds a @ )

How would I go about this? preg_match? ereg? strstr?Examples ?

Also - how would I find any non alpha numeric characters in a string so I
can give the user an error message. I dont want any characters besides
alpha-numeric in the strings.

[Geoff Berrow]

I noticed that Message-ID: <wo************ ********@comcas t.com> from
Chung Leong contained the following:

It's easiest to use regexp to deal with this sort of thing.
preg_match('/^[\w\.]+@\w+\.\w+/', $address) should do the trick.

Reg exp and easy in the same sentence?

if (!strpos($email ,"@"))
{
print "try again, email addresses must contain \"@\"";
}
else{
print "That's a fine email address!";
}

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

[Michel]

Your solution does not provide any check other than checking for existance
of @
The regexp does :)

Mich

"Geoff Berrow" <bl******@ckdog .co.uk> wrote in message
news:gi******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

I noticed that Message-ID: <wo************ ********@comcas t.com> from
Chung Leong contained the following:

It's easiest to use regexp to deal with this sort of thing.
preg_match('/^[\w\.]+@\w+\.\w+/', $address) should do the trick.

Reg exp and easy in the same sentence?

if (!strpos($email ,"@"))
{
print "try again, email addresses must contain \"@\"";
}
else{
print "That's a fine email address!";
}

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

[John Dunlop]

Michel wrote upsidedown:

"Geoff Berrow" <bl******@ckdog .co.uk> wrote in message
news:gi******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

if (!strpos($email ,"@")) [...]
Your solution does not provide any check other than checking for existance
of @

One of the queries was how to go about checking a string contained
"@". Using regular expression functions for that alone would be
inefficient.
The regexp does :)

Indeed. But it doesn't answer the other query (how to detect non-
alphanumeric characters in a string). So why use it?

I suspect Picture Dots is trying to confirm the validity of email
addresses, but neither the Subject line nor the body of the original
article says so. The pattern in question is insufficient for
checking email address syntax.

--
Jock

[Geoff Berrow]

I noticed that Message-ID: <c0*********@ne ws.cistron.nl> from Michel
contained the following:

Your solution does not provide any check other than checking for existance
of @
The regexp does :)

I know. But I think such checks are pointless anyway.
--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

[Chung Leong]

More or less. Mistyping a email address that's synatically correct is far
more likely than enter a invalid character. Doing a MX lookup might be more
worthwhile than trying to write a regexp that validates RFC822 conformance.

Uzytkownik "Geoff Berrow" <bl******@ckdog .co.uk> napisal w wiadomosci
news:bk******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

I noticed that Message-ID: <c0*********@ne ws.cistron.nl> from Michel
contained the following:

Your solution does not provide any check other than checking for existanceof @
The regexp does :)

I know. But I think such checks are pointless anyway.
--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

[Rahul Anand]

"Chung Leong" <ch***********@ hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<hs******* *************@c omcast.com>...

More or less. Mistyping a email address that's synatically correct is far
more likely than enter a invalid character. Doing a MX lookup might be more
worthwhile than trying to write a regexp that validates RFC822 conformance.

Uzytkownik "Geoff Berrow" <bl******@ckdog .co.uk> napisal w wiadomosci
news:bk******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

I noticed that Message-ID: <c0*********@ne ws.cistron.nl> from Michel
contained the following:

Your solution does not provide any check other than checking for existanceof @
The regexp does :)

I know. But I think such checks are pointless anyway.
--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

You can find a regular expression to validate email-address here:

http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html

Try using this if it worth using for your email-validation :)

--
Thanks,
Rahul Anand

[John Dunlop]

Rahul Anand wrote:

You can find a regular expression to validate email-address here:

http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
This is a Perl module which validates email addresses against the
syntax of RFC822 (obsoleted by RFC2822); the pattern itself will not
match all valid email addresses, despite its complexity.
Try using this if it worth using for your email-validation :)

Validating the syntax of an email address and finding it exists is
not proof of it being in use. If you'd like to know that what a user
entered is really her email address, then a confirmation mail is the
best way, as both the CGI FAQ and the Mail::RFC822::A ddress
documentation recommend.

--
Jock

[Rahul Anand]

John Dunlop <jo*********@jo hndunlop.info> wrote in message news:<MP******* *************** **@News.Individ ual.NET>...

Validating the syntax of an email address and finding it exists is
not proof of it being in use. If you'd like to know that what a user
entered is really her email address, then a confirmation mail is the
best way, as both the CGI FAQ and the Mail::RFC822::A ddress
documentation recommend.

Yes, I agree. Best way is to send a mail with confirmation URL or some
confirmation code. Only after actual validation you can be sure that
the request is authentic.

--
Cheers,
Rahul Anand