https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5380
--- Comment #6 from John Hardin <[email protected]> 2009-08-18 17:25:03 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > Given comment 3, the proposed limiting in comment 0 seems entire sensible. No > plain non-obfuscated "meds". No half-assed obfuscated one within a longer > word. > > Maybe using (\b|_) rather than \b, to catch that pathetic this-is-a-word-char > non-real-word char that underscore is. +1 to both. Performance question: which is more efficient? (?:\b|_)x(?:\b|_) \b_*x_*\b -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
