[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Handling "via" addresses
From: |
Roland Winkler |
Subject: |
Re: Handling "via" addresses |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Jul 2022 23:03:07 -0500 |
On Thu, Jul 07 2022, Sam Steingold wrote:
>> * Roland Winkler <jvaxyre@tah.bet> [2022-07-06 15:15:39 -0500]:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 06 2022, Sam Steingold wrote:
>>> Subject: [PATCH] Use `mail-header-parse-address' instead of
>>> `mail-extract-address-components'.
>>
>> There is also `gnus-extract-address-components' that is supposedly
>> faster than `mail-header-parse-address', though less accurate. Is this
>> an issue? How are these two functions used elsewhere?
>
> please see https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=56422
>
> Lars (who re-wrote gnus and wrote `mail-header-parse-address' writes):
>
>> mail-extract-address-components is a DWIM-ish thing that doesn't have
>> much documented behaviour -- it just tries to make things "pretty" by
>> applying lots of (mostly misguided) heuristics. So talking about
>> "correct" here isn't er correct.
>
>> If you have an RFC822bis From header, you should use
>> `mail-header-parse-address'. If you have something that's vaguely like
>> a mail header and want to split it, use `mail-header-parse-address-lax'.
I do not know the history. I vaguely remember that BBDB v2 contained
some remarks that BBDB up to v2 and mail-extract-address-components have
shared a common history. Even if mail-extract-address-components
applies mostly misguided heuristics, switching to
mail-header-parse-address can give rise to surprises for some users.
I want to look into this more carefully.
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/01
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/05
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Roland Winkler, 2022/07/05
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/06
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/06
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Roland Winkler, 2022/07/06
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/07
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/07
- Re: Handling "via" addresses,
Roland Winkler <=
- Re: Handling "via" addresses, Sam Steingold, 2022/07/12