HI Paul,

On Mon 2038-Feb-01 15:32, Paul Quinn (3:640/384) wrote to Richard Webb:



PQ> Man, I could have told you that.  In fact I did mean to, though it
PQ> is in the dox for ifnumber.  The way I used it in range testing I
PQ> wasn't interested in if's, but's or maybe's, or shades of grey/gray.
PQ> Where anything in the range proves okay then the errorlevel is zero
PQ> (0); anything else is errorlevel 1 or greater (like the 255) and is
PQ> an actual error.  Oh well.

Figured it might, but wanted to see how it acted with a text instead of
numeric string, figured it'd be a syntax error
type thing, i.e. 255.  But, wanted to make sure.  I usually
use that in my descending just to make sure I"ve done the
command line syntax for it correct in my batches, then we
don't even bother to test for it.  I.e. once the thing is
corrected we remove that one and just test for lower
errorlevels.

 RW> Was working on another batch project, my vessels
 RW> reconciliation file we talked about in this echo, cleaning
 RW> up the reports it generates and was testing some code I
 RW> intended to use for it, and in so doing crash tested what I
 RW> wanted to crash test for this project as well.

PQ> This is good.  Yes, I like to hear stories like this.  At least
PQ> someone else is still doing BATch stuff.  Sometimes I get an itch to
PQ> do a reality check when I'm doing the stuff I do here.  :)  No one
PQ> else sees it... luckily. 

NObody else sees it, but here they see the results.  LIke
sausage and laws, you don't wanna se it being made .
COpious amounts of cigarettes and coffee.

PQ> I did have a 'win' with my ISP last week after I found out that our
PQ> homepage hadn't been working for over a year, and had them fix the
PQ> glitch.  (It's mentioned in the NLSS.bat dox.)

GOod to hear that one too!  Mine here is the big monolith
phone company, and you might call 'em for weeks to get them
to straighten out a problem.  WE had phone line difficulties here for quite
awhile last October and NOvember, finally got them to actually send
somebody out here to sniff around.

 RW> THe other code was critical, as it runs in automation while
 RW> I"m in bed or absent, so it's important to get right the
 RW> first time .

PQ> Cool.
I"m almost satisfied with the reports it generates now.  A
few minor tweaks.  YOu might recall, or can refer to earlier in this echo. 
WE create a batch which looks at the entries
on my system to see if they're the same entries I received
via email from the other source.  IF not then't those that
aren't are posted to my data.  Trouble is, often at the end
of the process the file which should contain data was a zero byte file,
because there was no data that my system didn't
have.
So, we use good old ms dos find to look, note 0 spaces, i.e. 0 lines in file, as in

type filename.ext | find " " /i /c << somefile.txt


use nset to make an environment variable out of that figure, ifnumber to
test against a value of 1 or greater.

Been snowed in here all weekend, and one of my primary
antennas went down with a limb from big pin oak, so have
been spending a lot of time cleaning up bits of code here
and there.



Regards,
           Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+