https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6703
--- Comment #30 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #29) > (In reply to comment #26) > > (In reply to comment #22) > > > > > /^From \S+ ?[[:upper:]][[:lower:]]{2}(?:, \d\d [[:upper:]][[:lower:]]{2} > > > \d{4} [0-2]\d:\d\d:\d\d [+-]\d{4}| [[:upper:]][[:lower:]]{2} [ 1-3]\d [ > > > 0-2]\d:\d\d:\d\d \d{4})/ > > > > I doin't see the need of the sequence "(?:," in the regex. For me it works > > with "(," > > There is no reason to capture the results of the match for later use. > (?:...) is a non-capturing match, which is slightly more efficient. > > To allow for variations in whitespace, perhaps: > > /^From\s{1,5}\S+\s{1,5}[[:upper:]][[:lower:]]{2}(?:, \d\d > [[:upper:]][[:lower:]]{2} \d{4} [0-2]\d:\d\d:\d\d [+-]\d{4}| > [[:upper:]][[:lower:]]{2} [ 1-3]\d [ 0-2]\d:\d\d:\d\d \d{4})/ Well more importantly than specific kmail 2 mbox regexes , does the patch I wrote that let's someone use /^Mickey Mouse$/ as their mbox separator regular expression work? Regards, KAM -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
