dbenham wrote:I am not seeing the point of your subsequent post
My posts late in the night are ... suboptimal.... sorry for confusing you:jeb wrote:Your results are the expected ones, as delayed expansion is done only once, in the phases of the CALL there isn't any delayed expansion at all.
I'm getting more lazy writing explainations the later it is... especially when i'm unsure.
The point of my last post was to describe a bug (in short) (this is no proof that such a bug exist - it only should show that it may be possible; some kind of "brainstorming reasons"):
If delayed expansion could be switched off (and on again), then it might be, that a programmer has triggered/switched on or off delayed expansion in certain situations (example: calling batch/executing "|" (triggers), and "(...)" (switch on)) instead of simply switching it off (as an explaination of the "perverse beauty in the inverse symmetry").
(The same could be reached with applying an "delayed escaping" one time too many - in case of the first two examples.)
The code with "call call" just should prove that the interpreter may have such a control - i didn't think of referring to the parser rules.