• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.


53 posts in this topic

Some like to have redundant checks everywhere, trying to make their code absolutely bulletproof. It will never happen, human error, machine error, and fate will prevent it, but you can get close.

I call that foolproof instead. :ph34r:

And of course:

A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.


Usually it is a no-win/no-win situation, what you get at the end is more complex code/script, and anyway someone will be able to have it break or do something else. :(

I believe more in making the bare minimum checks and make the final user break it at will until he/she learns how to use it properly, i.e. make him/her more responsible, or if you prefer to behave more proactively than the usual "passive mode", expecially since batches/little .vbs scripts are normally a QUICK workaround around an issue or a more convenient way to run a set of otherwise complex commands.

The fact that I know not any other programming language and the usual guy which comes out saying "it can't be done in batch" sometimes causes the creation of one of my senselessly complex :w00t: batches (that a real programmer would write in a much more suitable language), but they still remain "quick and dirty tools" or (working ;) ) POC's, I would say that a suitable adjective for batches (and to a lesser extent .vbs) is "legacy":


legacy (adj) — A pejorative term used in the computer industry meaning "it works"

Now, the essence of a "quick and dirty" tool is to be BOTH quick AND dirty..... :whistle:



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO this is - besides smaller - "plainer":

1.000 bytes instead of 1.356 BUT including 10 bytes for the "@ECHO OFF", so actually 366 bytes smaller or almost 27% smaller :w00t:;).

ECHO ^If WScript.Arguments.Count ^<^> 2 then
ECHO WScript.Quit
ECHO end ^If
ECHO Const ForReading=1, ForWriting=2
ECHO Dim i,j
ECHO Set objFSO=CreateObject^("Scripting.FileSystemObject"^)
ECHO Set objInputFile=objFSO.OpenTextFile^(WScript.Arguments.Item^(0^),ForReading^)
ECHO Set objOutputFile=objFSO.OpenTextFile ^(WorkingDir ^& WScript.Arguments.Item^(1^),ForWriting,True^)
ECHO Set objDict=CreateObject^("Scripting.Dictionary"^)
ECHO objDict.CompareMode=1
ECHO j=0
ECHO On Error Resume Next
ECHO While Not objInputFile.AtEndOfStream
ECHO arrinputRecord=split^(objInputFile.Readline,"vbNewLine"^)
ECHO strFirstField=arrinputRecord^(0^)
ECHO ^If objDict.Exists^(strFirstField^) then
ECHO j=j+1
ECHO objDict.add strFirstField,strFirstField
ECHO End ^If
ECHO colKeys=objDict.Keys
ECHO For Each strKey in colKeys
ECHO objOutputFile.writeline objDict.Item^(strKey^)
ECHO objInputFile.Close
ECHO objOutputFile.Close


How about this one :angel

SET tokens=1
FOR /F "tokens=%tokens% delims=;" %%A IN ("If WScript.Arguments.Count <> 2 then;WScript.Quit;end If;Const ForReading=1, ForWriting=2;Dim i,j;Set objFSO=CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject");Set objInputFile=objFSO.OpenTextFile(WScript.Arguments.Item(0),ForReading);Set objOutputFile=objFSO.OpenTextFile (WorkingDir & WScript.Arguments.Item(1),ForWriting,True);Set objDict=CreateObject("Scripting.Dictionary");objDict.CompareMode=1;j=0;On Error Resume Next;While Not objInputFile.AtEndOfStream;arrinputRecord=split(objInputFile.Readline,"vbNewLine");strFirstField=arrinputRecord(0);If objDict.Exists(strFirstField) then;j=j+1;Else;objDict.add strFirstField,strFirstField;End If;Wend;colKeys=objDict.Keys;For Each strKey in colKeys;objOutputFile.writeline objDict.Item(strKey);Next;objInputFile.Close;objOutputFile.Close") DO IF NOT "%%A"=="" (ECHO>>yanklines.vbs %%A& SET /a tokens+=1& GOTO :yanks)

It's smaller (924 bytes vs. 998 bytes) and you also don't need to use any carets. The lines are merged into one and separated using semicolons.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's smaller (924 bytes vs. 998 bytes) and you also don't need to use any carets. The lines are merged into one and separated using semicolons.

And also completely unreadable.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.