RE: Problems with echo. (echo period)

[Keith Huntington]

> >> > Since "echo." is clearly a shell builtin, and 
> >> 
> >> I don't think "echo." is a shell builtin.  It is a 
> >> peculiar feature of the cmd.exe command parser.
> >
> > This is a semantic quibble.  The shell builtin 
> > is "echo", "echo." is an alternative form, and 
> 
> I believe that the real issue here is that, in some cases, 
> cmd.exe throws away a '.' after a built-in command.  So, 
> it isn't, IMO, strictly correct to add an 'echo.'.  

If things aren't confusing enough already... it's not 
just the "." that CMD.EXE will parse oddly after echo.  
Depending on your version of CMD.EXE, there are other 
chars which can also be put after echo, and will still 
result in the echo command being invoked.

For example, CMD.EXE under WinXP [Version 5.1.2600],
the echo command will "silently parse" the following
chars in addition to ".".  This is not an exhaustive
list, simply a list pulled together from some quick
testing on the command line:

   .(+\[]:;,/

I find it especially interesting that the \ and / chars
are parsed in this manner, since they already have special
meaning to the command shell.  The top puzzler to me is
the special case of using "/", assuming it is your default
switch char (which it is on my machine).

"Echo/?"   results in a help blurb

"Echo/This is a Test" resuts in "This is a test" being
echoed to the console.  Weird.

All of the other special chars above seem to act just
like the "." in "Echo.".

If it were JUST the special case of "Echo.", I would
absolutely be on the side of making the tweak to Make
to support the one special case... but now that I know
that CMD.EXE just has an obnoxious parser with some
undocumented rules, I feel that trying to emulate that
weirdness in Make would be an endless chase.  Best to
just leave it alone, IMO.

Keith