Message110548
| Author |
eric.araujo |
| Recipients |
ajaksu2, barry, eric.araujo, msapiro, r.david.murray |
| Date |
2010年07月17日.11:38:34 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.004149695 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1279366717.37.0.39131027997.issue1409460@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I wonder if this bug should be reopened. This behavior does not seem right to me:
parsing 'merwok'
expected ('merwok', '')
got ('', 'merwok')
parsing 'merwok wok@rusty'
expected ('', 'wok@rusty')
got ('', 'merwokwok@rusty')
(Generated with a twenty-line script just doing a loop and prints, not attached because boring.)
Are my expectations wrong? I don’t know if a string like "merwok" in my first example is a legal address in the relevant RFCs, nor do I know if the folding done in the second example is okay.
For background, the thing I’m trying to achieve is to take a string and parse it into name and email address, and print a warning if there is no email. It’d be nice if I could always test for "not parseaddr(s)[1]", or pass an argument to the function to get an exception. Maybe I’ll have to restrict my format and do my own parsing with str.[r]partition. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2010年07月17日 11:38:37 | eric.araujo | set | recipients:
+ eric.araujo, barry, msapiro, ajaksu2, r.david.murray |
| 2010年07月17日 11:38:37 | eric.araujo | set | messageid: <1279366717.37.0.39131027997.issue1409460@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2010年07月17日 11:38:35 | eric.araujo | link | issue1409460 messages |
| 2010年07月17日 11:38:34 | eric.araujo | create |
|