SPUG: One-liners on Windows via command.com

Tim Maher tim at consultix-inc.com
Fri Mar 25 09:52:12 PST 2005

On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 08:49:51AM -0800, Uri London wrote:
> Re: On my XP system, command.com is only 50k in size, but cmd.exe is
> 380k, which so far is the only difference I've noted 8-}
> command.com is a 16 bits application. This is the old DOS interpreter.
> On an XP system it doesn't run by itself, but under the Virtual Dos
> Machine (ntvdm.exe). It is there merely for backward compatibility. Why
> would anyone use command.com?

Speaking from my own experience, I can provide these reasons:

1) Because command.com might be the only name for a Windows hosted
   command-line interpreter that the user knows,
2) or even if the user knew that command.com was a 16 bit app and
   cmd.exe a 32 bit one, he didn't think his Perl one-liner would
   "benefit from the extra bits"
3) or the user might not know how cmd.exe is different, and be
   satisfied to stick with "good old" (feeble) command.com

P.S. My experience with Perl on Windows goes all the way back to /yesterday/!

| Tim Maher, PhD     (206) 781-UNIX      (866) DOC-PERL     (866) DOC-UNIX |
| tim(AT)Consultix-Inc.Com  http://TeachMePerl.Com  http://TeachMeUnix.Com |
|    Watch for my June, 2005 book: "Minimal Perl for UNIX/Linux People"    |

More information about the spug-list mailing list