DosTips.com

This is feasible, but very complex to do as a batch script.
It'll be much easier for you to use a Windows port of the Unix touch program.
For example get touch.exe in the GnuWin32 project zip file:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/getgnuwin32/

Lowsun wrote: ↑

01 Mar 2024 19:17

I was looking for a solution in the Winapi side of things. Do you have any ideas?

Sorry, I don't.
And this forum is not the best place for questions about C programming

The problem is not the space, but the quotes you added around the pathname of the program. These quotes are indeed necessary because of the space. But when you add them, PowerShell stops considering this object as a reference to a program to execute, and considers it as a string object. To fix that,...

I was wondering if you guys had any idea what the difference between the two loops are, and why it would cause such a difference? We know that GOTO and CALL are implemented very inefficiently in the cmd.exe shell. There have been many discussions about this on this forum. To get the best performanc...

I went way too fast: There were two serious problems with the %%>, %%<, %%&, %%| definitions added in the previous set of macros! The versions generated with delayed expansion on and off were not identical. They worked when used in the same expansion mode they were defined in, but not when used in t...

To access the %-metavar you have to use the tilde %%~%% Yes, thanks, I found that yesterday too, but could not post an update as the Dostips server was unresponsive. Obviously the ~ forces the parser to skip phase 1.1, and enter phase 1.2 directly. Here's an updated set of macros integrating this. ...

Continuing the discussion about FOR! macros improvement in another thread Automating the generation of macros usable within other macros, as this is moving way off the original Macro for Dummies topic.

I'm starting a new thread, because the discussion in Macro for Dummies is diverging way beyond the original subject. I've extended the four macros shown in post #15 in the above thread, to define four additional %%variables after 1 to 4 %expansions%: %%^> will generate a '>' character %%^< will gene...

OK, I got it at last: :# Define a %FOR!% macro, itself defining %%^^=^ and %%!=!, after one %expansion% for /f %%! in ("! =! ^^^!") do for /f %%1 in ("^ ^^^^ !!") do for %%~ in ("") do for %%+ in (%%1%%~~) do ^ set FOR%%!=for /f %%%%! in ^(^"%%! =%%! %%+%%+%%+%%!^"^) do for /f %%%%1%%1 in ^(^"%%1 %%...

I simply put them just behind, so %%^ expands to ^^!=! it automatically reduces to a single ^ Thanks for the tip, I should have tought of that :oops: I've easily fixed the FOR! macro using that technique, but I'm struggling to fix the other three. And (maybe related to my difficulties with the othe...

The rule for adding one more %expansion% depth level support is: 2x the 1st set of hats in %%^^ definition 4x the 2nd set of hats in %%^^ definition 4x+3 the set of hats in the %%! definition Which allows to simplify the second macro, and generate two more: :# Define a %FOR!% macro, itself defining ...

But independent of the usage of the %%! you need to handle also carets. This is precisely why this weekend I created the FOR! and FOR!! macros, used for building my WHILE and REPEAT macros. Having those exclamation and caret %%variables themselves defined in a macro makes it easier to reuse them al...

It's not possible to create a variable called " =". What about doing this for really reducing the risk to 0?

I've been playing with these WHILE, REPEAT, and BREAK macros for a while, and came up with several significant improvements. First, it's relatively easy to avoid the need for a WEND macro following the WHILE macro, while still preserving the ability to nest WHILE and REPEAT loops. Unfortunately, tha...

Code: Select all

for /f %%! in ("! ^! ^^^!") 

Why is there a '^' before the second '!' in the %%! definition above?

I've run lots of tests without that '^', and never had any problem with that: