in reply to (tye)Re: / vs. \ in Win32 (Re: Glob on Win32: porting 5.005 to 5.6)
in thread Glob on Win32: porting 5.005 to 5.6

My testing was on 95, you are probably using NT/ME/2000 I suspect?

cheers

tachyon

s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

  • Comment on Re: (tye)Re: / vs. \ in Win32 (Re: Glob on Win32: porting 5.005 to 5.6)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(tye)Re2: / vs. \ in Win32 (Re: Glob on Win32: porting 5.005 to 5.6)
by tye (Sage) on Sep 04, 2001 at 20:20 UTC

    Actually, I meant to be discussing cmd.exe not command.(exe|com) and so Win95 doesn't count (since it doesn't have cmd.exe). But your testing matched my testing on both WinNT and Win2K: "./test.bat" and "temp/test.bat" didn't work. But "c:/temp/test.bat" did. So even cmd.exe doesn't support / as well as it supports \, but it does support / as a directory path separator in some cases.

            - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
[reply]

      On 95 it is even weirder, using old faithful: 

      C:\>c:\temp\test

C:\>REM Hello tye!

C:\>c:/temp/test

C:\>

      [download]

      No error but no run neither!

      cheers

      tachyon

      s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom