[Barry A. Warsaw]
Except that I think `@'-less regexps still have useful semantics, so I don't want to prohibit them. I just want the matching to (eventually) always be done against the entire recip address, not just the localpart.
Then wouldn't it make more sense to already now try matching the regexp against the entire address, even if the regexp does not contain any '@'?
Your change will cause the (not too far-fetched, IMO) regexp
.*\.uio\.no$
to _only_ be matched against the localpart (and thus very likely _not_ produce a match) for now, although you're saying that you eventually want it to match against the entire address (and that likely _will_ produce a match).
So, I still say:
If the regexp does not contain an '@', first try matching it against the localpart (i.e. the way things work now).
If 1) was skipped *or* if it didn't produce a match, try matching against entire recip address (i.e. try this even if the regexp does not contain any '@' signs).
Or am I misunderstanding something?
Harald