Update regular expression for parsing recipient values #193
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ontaining additional quotes Found in production, an e-mail has the 'from' field with the following value: ```ex ""[email protected]" " <[email protected]> ```` which is incorrectly parsed into `[email protected]\"` instead of ```ex {"\"[email protected]\"", "[email protected]"} ````
I’ve broken the regular expression to match three distinct types of address 1. Quoted name with address 2. Non-quoted name with address 3. address on it’s own I have also changed to expanded notation to make it a little clearer.
andrewtimberlake
force-pushed
the
pull-191
branch
from
4306594 to
7fc46ed
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I’ve broken the regular expression to match three distinct types of address
I have also changed to expanded notation to make it a little clearer.
This provides a fix for #191
NOTE: This still does not correctly parse all valid address spec values. It won’t handle comments or group syntax to name two I can immediately think of. To solve that, we’ll need a proper address spec parser