Re: piping / redirecting into a vbs script ?

Kerr-Mudd, John <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 24 Apr 2024 12:46:12 GMT
> Frank Slootweg <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > [Disclaimer: I don't know the first thing about VBScript, but have a
> > brain and am not afraid to use it.]
> > 
> > VanguardLH <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > 
> > > In this case, he wants files themselves to do reads and writes of other
> > > files.  He wants data objects aka files to be programs themselves, so
> > > files can read and write, and can do anything else he wants.  He has
> > > watched too many Marvel and Harry Potter movies.  Logic interferes with
> > > his obstreperous temperament.
> > 
> >   FTR, AFAICT he does *not* "want files themselves to do reads and
> > writes of other files". (I think) That's your misunderstanding. The
> > 'files' are not "data objects", but a VBScript (myvbscript[.vbs]), i.e.
> > it *is* a program. That's clear by the fact that the .vbs file *is*
> > executed.
> > 
> >   I don't know how a .vbs file gets executed, but I assume it works like
> > .exe and .bat files that the command interpreter (cmd.exe) sees that
> > myvbscript is actually myvbscript.vbs and hence calls wscript.exe to
> > execute myvbscript.vbs.
> 
> You'd be wrong there; 'anyfile.vbs' (or any other 'thing' gets dealt with
> by Windows 'associations'); anything ending with '.vbs' would
> normally be associated with 'wscript.exe'

  Of course, but the point is that in Rudy's first examples, he doesn't
use myvbscript.vbs, but just myvbscript. So *something* must translate
myvbscript to myvbscript.vbs, *before* file associations, i.e.
associating .vbs with wscript.exe, come into play. My guess was/is that
the 'command interpreter' (Rudy doesn't say how he invokes his commands)
does the ttranlation from myvbscript to myvbscript.vbs.

> '.exe' & '.bat' files (again, normally) get sent to the command interpreter
> and are then either executed (if EXE by loading and finding the start
> point) or seen as BATCH and interpreted by the command (or should I say
> CMD) parser.

  Again, first something has to translate from <filename> to
<filename>.exe or <filename>.bat. I think (for example) cmd.exe does
that translation.

> >   Rudy's problem is that he can't imagine that someone interprets his
> > posts in any other way than he does. If there's another interpretation,
> > it's the other guy's fault and things go downhill from there.
> 
> He does seem to want to specify his 'problem' very tightly but then not
> accept any workaround suggested. It's pointless trying to help ISTM.