Hi Robert, > On Jan 9, 2022, at 12:31 PM, Robert Riebisch <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Jerome, > >> As everyone knows and the docs clearly state, everything after a REM is >> ignored. >> >> However, I recently noticed an issue with a batch file that had something >> like: >> >> REM this thing [[x|4]] or later >> >> in one of its remarks. Every time the batch was executed, it displayed a >> “4]]” command not found error. >> >> Out of curiosity, I checked under MS-DOS 6.22. It exhibited the same >> behavior. I have a vague recollection of noticing this decades ago as well. >> >> It is a bug. But, it’s a bug that MS-DOS has as well. >> >> What’s you opinion? Should FreeCOM replicate this “feature” or fix the bug? >> >> Personally, I think it should be fixed. No one should be using that. If they >> were, I feel they are technically just exploiting a bug and there is no >> obligation to continue supporting that “feature.” >> >> I don’t/won’t work on FreeCOM. I’m just curious about your thoughts on this. > > Just leave it in. By the way, it's the same with '<' or '>’.
Well out of more curiosity, I just tried it from an XP command.com window. REM this | echo that It generated no output. FYI, COMMAND.COM <http://command.com/> for Win95 & Win98 both output text as well. However, there really is no MS-DOS latter than 6.22 and COMMAND.COM <http://command.com/> from Win95+ probably don’t count. But, MS did eventually fix it in there command shell. :-) Jerome
_______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
