On 08/30/2015 04:43 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 02:06:26AM -0700, Nelson Kelly wrote:
>>
>> All the new spams appear to be of a slightly different format from which
>> I described in the OP.
>>
>> [email protected]
>> [email protected]
I'm now seeing these too.
> Try this regex instead:
>
> ^.*\+.*?\d{3,}@
>
>
> The meaning of it is:
>
> ^ start of string
> .* any number of characters
> \+ a literal plus sign
> .*? any number of characters (non-greedy)
> \d{3,} at least three digits
> @ a literal at sign
>
>
> I'm not sure if the difference between "non-greedy" .*? and "greedy" .*
> is important in this case.
It doesn't matter here. It would matter if there were groups. E.g.,
^.*\+(.*?)(\d{3,})@
In this case, the (.*?) group would match everything after the '+' up to
and not including the digits and the (\d{3,}) group would match all the
digits.
If the first group were greedy, i.e. (.*) without the ?, it would match
up to the last 3 digits and the (\d{3,}) group would match only the last
3 digits.
--
Mark Sapiro <[email protected]> The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
