From: tlvargo@sbcglobal.netz   
      
   On 11/8/2012 6:24 AM, Fairfax wrote:   
   > On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:44:48 +0800, billious   
      
   >> You seem to be very carefully avoiding telling us the critical matter -   
   >> what is the format of %DATE% on the machine in question?   
   >   
   > Carefully avoiding , no.  Just not going off into a different   
   > tangent.  The date format is simply mm-dd-yyyy which doesn't give you   
   > ordered results when you view in detailed mode.  That's why I prefer   
   > yyyy.mm.dd.ddd and the periods are just my preference as the easiest   
   > way to view dates.  But, as I mentioned, they don't allow changing of   
   > the regional settings.  I'm guessing because of the many databases   
   > they have and a comment about the major date formatting problems they   
   > were having.   
   >   
   > I mean ... seriously ... have the database developers never heard of   
   > masking to force date entry to conform to a specific format???!!!  I   
   > sometimes wonder at the experts .   
   >   
   >> Note that it IS possible that the format of %DATE% and %TIME% used could   
   >> contain separators such as "/", "-", "." "," ":" and possibly symbols   
   >> such as "am" AND the various elements may be leading-zero-suppressed.   
   >>   
   >> If the dayname isn't displayed and you really want it, then it CAN be   
   >> derived with a GREAT DEAL of code if VBS, etc. is not available.   
   >   
   > I prefer batch, actually.  VBS seems to be locked down in some places   
   > wherease batch seems to run quite freely.   
      
   Regional settings have nothing to do with databases or the way files are   
   sorted by name. With batch, you don't need to modify regional settings   
   at the OS level, as you are currently doing. There are several ways to   
   extract the raw date/time from the system, you just have to be open to   
   exploring them.   
      
   So the date format is simply mm-dd-yyyy without the ddd? As billious   
   mentioned, ddd can be extracted from mm-dd-yyyy with extra batch code.   
   However, if the format is actually, "ddd mm-dd-yyyy" that would   
   eliminate the need for calculating ddd. Hence, you can see the reason   
   you have been asked to state the actual format of %date%.   
      
   However, since yyyy.mm.dd lists by name in the chronological order as   
   you stated, the ddd part really has no significance to listing the   
   files. So why include ddd at all?   
      
   Your original post only mentioned your home computer and at work, which   
   lead us to believe that other places were irrelevant. Are now indicating   
   that a broader range of unknown systems are involved too?   
      
   Is VBS or WMIC actually locked down at work? Or are you only repeating   
   the comment from foxi, because you are unfamiliar with using them?   
      
   What about the WMIC code posted by foxi? Did you try using it? Did it   
   work or fail? You stated, "I can run the batch file, I just don't get   
   good results." What results did you get? It is not possible to advise   
   when details are withheld.   
      
   --   
   Todd Vargo   
   (Post questions to group only. Remove "z" to email personal messages)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)