中国DOS联盟

call echo %var% ?
I feel like if
call echo %%var%%
Call once adds a pair of %
It seems..

The code on floor 45 is really concise and clear.

But I still declare
This kind of abbreviation is really uninteresting
First execute for and then execute echo %n%
It is simple and clear
And it won't have the above-mentioned problems I mentioned

One-line code and multi-line code each have their own advantages and disadvantages

It is improper to erase the role of either party

The reason for writing it in one line is nothing but wanting to make use of call

Thus illustrating that call replaces the role of setlocal enabledelayedexpansion to a certain extent

Can it replace 100%? It's undecided!

Originally posted by plp626 at 2008-6-26 18:53:
There was such a heated discussion just about variable delay. I feel that the code of the thread starter is nothing new, which I often use when writing "subroutines".

But let me say something off-topic, the example the thread starter gave is not...

Actually, it's because I thought of what you said about "subroutines" that I posted this. In addition to this place, it can also be used in other places that need to be incremented.

Also, I still don't know many commands, like find, findstr, etc. So some codes that could have been simple are also written complicated.

Originally posted by PPdos at 2008-6-25 19:51:
It is also possible to use the intermediate result

(for /f "tokens=*" %i in ('dir /b') do set /a n+=1 >nul&call set _%n%=%i >nul)&call echo There are %n% files(folders) in the directory

Paste the code into the command prompt and run it multiple times, and you will see that the number keeps increasing, which does not match the actual number of files(folders).

 Last edited by asnahu on 2009-8-7 at 04:20 ]