Re: Checking if email is valid
> > On 11/3/2023 6:51 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote: > > > On 2023-11-03, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 12:21, AVI GROSS via Python-list > > > python-list@python.org wrote: > > > > > > > My guess is that a first test of an email address might be to see if > > > > a decent module of that kind fills out the object to your > > > > satisfaction. You can then perhaps test parts of the object, rather > > > > than everything at once, to see if it is obviously invalid. As an > > > > example, what does u...@alpha...com with what seems to be lots of > > > > meaningless periods, get parsed into? > > > > > > What do you mean by "obviously invalid"? Have you read the RFC? > > > > What do you mean by 'What do you mean by "obviously invalid"?' > > Have you read the RFC? > > > About reading the RFC, there's this ... but read the comments too ... > > https://haacked.com/archive/2007/08/21/i-knew-how-to-validate-an-email-address-until-i.aspx/ > > Wow. I'm half tempted to make a weird email address to see how many websites get it wrong. Thank you for the link. Simon. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Checking if email is valid
> > > On 2023-11-02, Simon Connah simon.n.con...@protonmail.com wrote: > > > Valid as in conforms to the standard. Although having looked at the > > standard that might be more difficult than originally planned. > > > Yes. Almost nobody actually implements "the standard" as in RFC 2822 > section 3.4.1 (which can contain, for example, non-printable control > characters, and comments), nor is it particularly clear that they > should. So while checking against "the spec" might sound right, it's > highly unlikely that it's what you actually want. Would you really > want to allow: > > (jam today) "chris @ \"home\""@ (Chris's host.)public.example > > for example? And would you be able to do anything with it if you did? As I said in another post it would be interesting to see what broke when you tried to use an esoteric email address in the wild. Maybe when I'm bored :D. Simon. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Checking if email is valid
On 11/4/23 02:51, Simon Connah via Python-list wrote: > Wow. I'm half tempted to make a weird email address to see how many websites > get it wrong. > > Thank you for the link. Nearly all websites seem to reject simple correct email addresses such as myemail+sometext@example.domain. I like to use this kind of email address when I can to help me filter out the inevitable spam that comes from companies selling off my address even after claiming they won't. So I suspect that nearly all websites are going to reject other kinds of weird email addresses you can create that are actually correct. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Python-list Digest, Vol 242, Issue 3
I don 't understand the meaning of this mail Verzonden vanaf mijn Galaxy Oorspronkelijk bericht Van: python-list-requ...@python.org Datum: 04-11-23 17:01 (GMT+01:00) Aan: python-list@python.org Onderwerp: Python-list Digest, Vol 242, Issue 3 Send Python-list mailing list submissions topython-list@python.orgTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-listor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to python-list-request@python.orgYou can reach the person managing the list at python-list-owner@python.orgWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specificthan "Re: Contents of Python-list digest..." -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: pip/pip3 confusion and keeping up to date
Am Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 04:07:33PM -0600 schrieb Mats Wichmann via Python-list: > >So they now have only python3 and there is no python executable in > >PATH. > > FWIW, for this you install the little stub package python-is-python3. > Especially if you > want to keep a python2 installation around - "python" will still be python3 > in this > case. Since you seem knowledgeable in this area: Do you know of a resource for learning the *canonical* way of packaging a Python application for installation via apt which - needs some packages available via apt - needs some packages only available via pip - needs some packages newer than what is available via apt ? Thanks, Karsten -- GPG 40BE 5B0E C98E 1713 AFA6 5BC0 3BEA AC80 7D4F C89B -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: pip/pip3 confusion and keeping up to date
On 2023-11-03, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > Am Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 09:35:43PM - schrieb Jon Ribbens via Python-list: > > Regardless of ... > >> Because pip barely plays well by itself, let alone with other package >> managers at the same time. > > ... being true ... > >> > I do only install a few things using pip. >> >> Are they not available in your system's package manager? > > ... this clearly often answers to "no" for applications of > any complexity. > > Is there a suggested proper path to deal with that (Debian is > of interest to me here) ? Yes, as previously mentioned, use virtual environments. These days they don't even need to be "activated". For package 'foo' for example you could create /usr/local/lib/foo, under which you would create a virtual environment and install the 'foo' package inside it, and then you could do: ln -s /usr/local/lib/foo/env/bin/foo /usr/local/bin/foo and then you could just type 'foo' to run it. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Checking if email is valid
On 2023-11-04, Michael Torrie via Python-list wrote: > On 11/4/23 02:51, Simon Connah via Python-list wrote: > >> Wow. I'm half tempted to make a weird email address to see how many >> websites get it wrong. In my experience, they don't have to be very weird at all. >> Thank you for the link. > > Nearly all websites seem to reject simple correct email addresses > such as myemail+sometext@example.domain. I like to use this kind of > email address when I can to help me filter out the inevitable spam > that comes from companies selling off my address even after claiming > they won't. I've always suspected that's intentional. They refuse those sorts of e-mail addresses because they know that's what they are used for. If they allowed "plus suffixed" e-mail addresses, then all the crap they want to send to you would go into /dev/null where it belongs -- and we can't have that! > So I suspect that nearly all websites are going to reject other > kinds of weird email addresses you can create that are actually > correct. Definitely. Syntactic e-mail address "validation" is one of the most useless and widely broken things on the Interwebs. People who do anything other than require an '@' (and optionally make you enter the same @-containing string twice) are deluding themselves. -- Grant -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
