I am attempting a task that would work if I could use
(inside a batch file) the 'enhanced syntax for variable
references:

%~nI - expands %I to a file name only

which I first discovered this week. I am running MS WinXP,
Ver 5.1.2600 (with Svc pak 2) on a SysteMax Venture with a
3.4 GHz Pentium D, 1.00 GB of RAM.

The following is a 1-line batch file--t.bat:

for %%~nS in (*.c) do echo c51Cmd %%S NML SPV_BETA

The c51Cmd is another batch file. I will replace 'echo' with
'call' should I ever get this thing to work.

When I run it as shown, I get:
>
> M:\xxx>t
> %~nS was unexpected at this time.
>
> M:\xxx> for %~nS in (*.c) do echo c51Cmd %
> S NML SPV_BETA
>

I had doubled the percent sign, since it had been necessary
in all prior versions of Windows. I decided to remove one
'%':
>
> M:\xxx>t
> The following usage of the PATH operator in batch-parameter
> substitution is invalid: %~nS in (*.c) do echo c51Cmd %S NML SPV_BETA
>
>
> For valid formats type CALL /? or FOR /?
> t was unexpected at this time.
>
> M:\xxx> for %~nS in (*.c) do echo c51Cmd %
> S NML SPV_BETA
>

I read though all the HELP I could get from windows. On one
web forum I saw an inference that that the 'enhanced'
features could not be used unless extended PARAMETERS were
enabled. I found no WAY to query my command interpreter as
to whether this was true, but did find a way to run it with
them on:

cmd /E:ON
for %%~nS in (*.c) do echo c51Cmd %%S NML SPV_BETA
exit

No difference.

Does this feature really work, or is MicroSoft just jerking
my chain?
============================================================
Gary Lynch | To send mail change no$pam in my
[emailprotected]$pam.com | domain name to stacoenergy
============================================================Just one tiny mistake, the for %%S defines the variable, its after the DO that you use the variable expansion, like this below

for %%S in (*.c) do echo c51Cmd %%~nS NML SPV_BETA

GrahamQuote

Does this feature really work, or is MicroSoft just jerking
my chain?