Re: [MSH] MSH Not So Great For Interactive Users

Thomas Lee wrote:

Specifically, MSH should
be at least as good as csh/tcsh at reducing the number
of characters I have to type (I recognize and agree that
these shells are awful for scripting).

First, remember that the way MSH is hosted limits MS's flexability. There is some tab completion, but the limitations of the MSH host for V1 leads partly to what you suggest. 

Several people have mentioned this, but I don't understand
what they mean. I can understand that MSH doesn't have the
kinds of features I was talking about because the developers
just haven't gotten around to adding them, but I don't
see any technical obstacles to adding them just because
MSH is a console application or because of "the way
MSH is hosted".

Could someone elaborate?

Thanks,
Jon Forrest
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [MSH] Problems with directory names containing square brackets
    ... This is a known issue that we have been spending time thinking about. ... characters and treat them just like any other character. ... square brackets and backticks in their name, due to msh using these ... characters as wildcard etc. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.scripting)
  • re: MSH: Is File/Content Binary?
    ... This is usually done via heuristics. ... by checking if any character is outside of the printable range. ... If that matters to you, you might go for a different heuristic, based on the percentage of characters below 0x20, for example. ... Conversation: MSH: Is File/Content Binary? ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.scripting)