Possible bug : Function not implemented

[wanderer]

TC7pb3. Type a number (only) in the command line, i.e. "1". When you press Enter, you get the message "function not implemented". Is this normal behavior or a bug?

[Clo]

2wanderer

Hi !

• It seems normal as long as "1" doesn't represent any legal command¦alias…

 KR
Claude
Clo

[Slavic]

It's interesting! User can be surprised that digits 1...9 are reserved for some internal commands (and cannot be the file names, yes?), but 0, in contrary, isn't linked to any command: the common message "File not found" is shown

[wanderer]

It seems normal as long as "1" doesn't represent any legal command¦alias…

This did not happen in TC 6.56 so i assume that either is an error message from a new feature which correctly appears there or an error message that should not appear at all.

[wanderer]

It's interesting! User can be surprised that digits 1...9 are reserved for some internal commands (and cannot be the file names, yes?), but 0, in contrary, isn't linked to any command: the common message "File not found" is shown

Not really. Try a larger number, i.e. "1223523552". You'll get the same message.

[ghisler(Author)]

I was asked by several users to support internal commands in the command line - not only by name cm_xyz, but also by number. If the number doesn't correspond to an internal command, an error will be shown.

What do you think, what should be changed? Should this function be removed at all? Or should I try to run a program 1.exe if there is no internal command "1"?

[VadiMGP]

This problem was already reported.
http://www.ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=13844

[wanderer]

I was asked by several users to support internal commands in the command line - not only by name cm_xyz, but also by number. If the number doesn't correspond to an internal command, an error will be shown.

What do you think, what should be changed? Should this function be removed at all? Or should I try to run a program 1.exe if there is no internal command "1"?

Wow, isn't that a little confusing? Ok, it is a nice feature but what if someone has a file named 1.exe and a command named 1? Maybe the following is the best:

- both exe file and internal command do not exist: display a message saying "file not found".
- only one of the two exists (exe file or internal command): execute whichever is appropriate.
- both exe file and internal command exist: display a small window with three buttons "close, execute internal command, execute exe" and let the user decide. The same thing you do when a user tries to execute an exe inside a zip which contains more than one file: "close, unpack and execute, unpack all and execute".

[Sombra]

What do you think, what should be changed? Should this function be removed at all? Or should I try to run a program 1.exe if there is no internal command "1"?

Hmmm... Perhaps the internal command only should run if is launched with a combination of keys. Example: ALTGR + ENTER
Shift+Enter isn't viable if exist number.pif or an packed file without extension...
Note that ALTGR+Enter place the cursor at begin of commandline.

CTRL+Shift+Enter ??

[szlori]

Yes, there should be a search order, perhaps: internal command -> file
If both exists, you could display a dialog as wanderer suggested or simply apply the search order and execute the internal command.

Better yet (at least in my opinion) impose that internal commands should be prepended with a special character when entered on the command line.
This character could be one that is invalid in the file name: ex. the question mark (?)
So, for example, user would need to enter: ?323 or ?cm_SrcBySize
In this case there would be no ambiguity between internal command and file.

[VadiMGP]

I think simple and flexible solution is a new option "EnableRunInternalCommand" with the wollowing values:
0 - commands are disabled;
1 - commands are enabled and have higher priority then external commands;
2 - commands are enabled and have lover priority then external commands;

[wanderer]

0 - commands are disabled;
1 - commands are enabled and have higher priority then external commands;
2 - commands are enabled and have lover priority then external commands;

3 - always ask the user to choose (dialog). Which could also be the default, so users know there is a new feature when they install TC7.

[Slavic]

I suppose that such option should be disabled by default for common users (but mentioned in Help). Advanced users would be able to enable it manually in wincmd.ini. Also I think that using a special character before these numbers is a good idea, even for advanced users. The better solution is to select the character that can't exist in the normal command line (DOS restrictions). Will it be a question mark or other symbol, is not so important.

[wanderer]

I suppose that such option should be disabled by default for common users (but mentioned in Help).

A user may be advanced enough to create a custom command but there is no assurance he will know that custom commands are supported in the command line. Perhaps option 3 should be the default - it seems helpful and safe too.

Also I think that using a special character before these numbers is a good idea, even for advanced users. The better solution is to select the character that can't exist in the normal command line (DOS restrictions). Will it be a question mark or other symbol, is not so important.

If option 3 exists, there is no need for a special character (unless someone wishes to force the execution of an internal command, even if a file exists with the same name and not have a new window popping-up every time, asking what to do).

[szlori]

I was saying about the special character, because it's a common practice.
It's same for environment variables: you use % (or $).

These internal commands are a bit like "command variables" (well "constants" most of them, but you get the idea...)