Re: [h-e-w] pb with the use of Merge

[Nat Goodspeed]

At 03:03 PM 5/4/2007, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> > In bash, I just did this:
> >
> > for i in original/*.jpg;do convert -resize 50% $i 
> smaller/`basename $i`;done
> >
> > Try doing that in one line in cmd.
>
> No problem:
>
>    for %F in (original\*.jpg) do convert -resize 50% %F smaller\%~nxF
>
> Sounds like the last time you looked at the half-baked MS equivalents
> was a long time ago.  The latest (since W2K) versions of cmd are much
> smarter than their old namesakes.

<way off topic>
  Sorry, couldn't resist.
  It's true that new versions of cmd are much more powerful than 
ever before. They've tried to adopt many semantic features of the 
Bourne shell and its many descendants. The trouble is that rather 
than borrowing syntax as well, they've invented some truly astonishing kludges.
  I have a small bash script, a helper used by other scripts, that 
searches for the base of my current Subversion work area. It writes 
the pathname to standard output. Typical usage in a bash script:
cd "$(find-workarea)"
  I recently had to write a .bat script (don't ask) in which I 
wanted to use the same helper. Yes, it certainly is *possible*. 
Here's what I had to write:
for /f "usebackq" %%w in (`bash find-workarea`) do cd %%w
  Easy. Obvious. Natural. ;-)
</way off topic>