On Sun, 16 Jan 2022, Jim Hall wrote:
I have a paper copy of a few original MS-DOS manuals. My MS-DOS 4
manual says the only separators allowed in a comment are whitespace
but didn't mention redirection. But the MS-DOS 5 manual specifically
says *not* to use redirection in REM.
So this was a
On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 1:19 PM tom ehlert wrote:
>
>
> > 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
Technically, REM is a regular DOS command just like the others -- it's not a
"comment" like we're used to seeing in most coding languages. If you type
"REM" at a command line it doesn't give you a "Bad Command" error message
because it is a legitimate command even though it doesn't really do
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 1:39 AM Jerome Shidel wrote:
>
>
> Since the docs say everything after the REM is ignored,
> I feel that the behavior is not consistent with the stated
> behavior. So, it is a bug in either the handling of the pipe
> in a REM statement. Or, it is a bug in the
> 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]]”
Hi Robert,
> On Jan 9, 2022, at 12:31 PM, Robert Riebisch 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
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
Hi Jose,
> On Jan 8, 2022, at 7:46 PM, Jose Senna wrote:
>
> Jerome Shidel said:
>
>> 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.
>
> It is not a bug, "|" is the sign for a pipe, so the
>
Jerome Shidel said:
> 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.
It is not a bug, "|" is the sign for a pipe, so the
parser thinks the output should be piped to 4]].
Of course, one would expect
On Sat, 8 Jan 2022, Jerome Shidel wrote:
Hi all,
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
On Saturday, January 8th, 2022 at 7:17 PM, Jerome Shidel jer...@shidel.net
wrote:
> ...
>
> Personally, I think it should be fixed. No one should be using that.
>
> ...
Agreed 100%. :)___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Hi all,
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
12 matches
Mail list logo
