> In general, I find that toggling options are a bad idea. Things > just get too confusing, especially if you have multiple "sources" > for the options (like combinations of internal/compile-time default > settings, environment variables, options entered through a batch > file, options entered via a command-line, etc.). It just gets too > confusing to keep track of whether in total you've entered an even or odd > number of "toggles".
> I usually set up my programs so that there is a +/- or yes/no > "sub-option". Rather than toggling, there is an "override" or > "priority" process of which option to use. For example, an option > provided through an environment variable takes priority over a > default/internal option -- it does not "toggle" the internal option > but rather completely overrides it. Similarly, an option entered on > the command-line takes priority over an option provided through an > environment variable. I find this approach much less confusing than toggling. I agree with your reasoning, but the reasoning is pretty much irrelevant. The rules are made by MS COMMAND.COM, and are most likely (most of the times?) set, not toggle. now I wonder who will verify this, and why did the original author even implement toggling instead of setting. maybe even one of our assembler gurus looks at published sources of msdos 2.01 Tom _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
