On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:14:54 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> ISTR that it used to be (at least) with DOS that the interpreter/shell
>> (ie, command.com) had special handlers for .com and .exe and that you
>> couldn't execute a program with.

Whoops, I meant "without those extensions", and then my brain kicked in 
and reminded me that it was command.com that did that, not the DOS kernel.

> I'm not sure what that means. But yeah, I don't necessarily count
> Explorer (for example) as "part of the OS". It's just a shell.

Yep.

> But that's what I meant by "except maybe EXE and DLL files". I'm not
> sure if the extension is required to be there for some of the exec/spawn
> type calls to work.

At least in DOS, it's not.

Jim

Post a reply to this message