Hey guys,
Following my suggestion last week that '.*' was not implemented the way
I expected, I have resigned to the fact that either it IS implemented
wrong, or rather I still don't understand the logic.
Regardless, I do require a work around. I allow people to enter rules on
a website in the form of "Block anything with subject '*money*".
Alternatively, they can say "Block anything with subject 'money'". In
other words, I need to transform these rules with common DOS wild-cards
into iMail style regular expression rules.
So, I can translate '*money*' into just "Contains money', but what if
the rule entered is "free*stuff". If I translate this into "Contains
'free.*stuff' it will catch "free stuff" but NOT "freestuff", which I
want it to catch.
I have tried rules like 'free.*stuff' (as previously discussed I think
this SHOULD work, but doesn't). I have also tried 'free.{0,1000}stuff'
(which I also think SHOULD work, but doesn't). What else can I do?
My only recourse at this point it to translate 'free*stuff' into:
S=freestuff!OR!S~freestuff!OR!S~free.*stuff
This is clumsy, but works. I would be MUST nicer if I have a series of
symbols that translated into "zero or more occurrences of ANY character"
which actually matched to the nothing string between 'free' and 'stuff'
in "freestuff".
Barring this, I can't even THINK about translating 'free*stuff*is*good',
which will expand into an exponential number of sub-rules to cover all
the cases I want.
Any other ideas? Thanks,
-Chase
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
