Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!hao!ames!amdahl!dlb!plx!dick
From: dick@plx.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Improve response time with paths
Message-ID: <870@plx.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Nov-87 19:12:32 EST
Article-I.D.: plx.870
Posted: Wed Nov 11 19:12:32 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Nov-87 10:55:44 EST
References: <15000048@silver> <2408@im4u.UUCP>
Reply-To: dick@plx.UUCP (Dick Flanagan)
Organization: From a cave in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Lines: 28
Summary: CED is great, but. . . .

Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Disclaimer:  I wrote it.  Nobody else.  Just me.

In article <2408@im4u.UUCP> jai@im4u.UUCP (Jai Srinivasan) writes:
>Here is an alternative to using BAT files.  Get CED and use its synonym
>feature.  [...]

First two qualifiers:

1.  I also think CED is the slickest thing since [fill in the blank].
2.  I am not familiar with PCED.

However, the biggest drawback I have found with plain, vanilla CED is that,
unlike batch files, it cannot be invoked by:

o   other batch files (limited facilities prior to DOS 3.3)
o   for..in..do constructs
o   cannot be forked/exec'ed from within executing tasks

Awhile ago a fellow on GEnie said that, since he got CED, the only 
batch file he has anymore is his AUTOEXEC file.  Wellllllllll, as
limiting as current DOS batch files are, to replace all batch files
with CED synonyms is to either abuse CED or have only very simple
batch files to begin with (try an 'if exist..goto..' under CED).

So in my opinion CED is an invaluable supplement to regular batch
files, but cannot--and should not--replace them.
-- 
Dick Flanagan, W6OLD                          I'll take a drug test when
UUCP:  ...!ucbvax!sun!plx!dick                Reagan takes an IQ test.
GEnie: FLANAGAN