Is it possible to redirect the output of a batch file inside the script?
Solution 1
One way of doing it is the following. Use the call
command to execute a label in the script. Edit I realized the first version I posted does not seem to work in a cmd.exe prompt (I was using TCC). The following seems to work in both command processors:
@echo off
call :testitout > t.tmp
goto:eof
:testitout
echo Hi There
echo Goodbye
Solution 2
> is the standard, so you're more-or-less stuck with that; however, you can move it inside the batch file:
foo.bat:
@echo off
@echo Start File > StdOut.txt
@dir >> StdOut.txt
@echo End File >> StdOut.txt
SwDevMan81
Twitter: @SwDevMan81 Mail: SwDevMan81 at Gmail Feel free to ping me for any questions you have. Job Title: Software Engineer Job Develop: Software for radar systems, Software GUI, real time embedded Current Languages: C#, C++, Java AS: Monroe Community College (Engineering Science) BS: University at Buffalo (Computer Science) MS: University at Buffalo (Computer Science & Engineering) MBA: Syracuse University (Business Analytics) Sites: Design Patterns Salt
Updated on June 17, 2022Comments
-
SwDevMan81 almost 2 years
I would like to set the standard output of a batch script to go to a file. I would like to do this inside the script if possible.
Note: I do not want to do this:
foo.bat > StdOut.txt
I would like to do something inside the script to redirect the output to a file
For example:foo.bat
:: Redirect standard output to StdOut.txt :: Insert batch code to do what I want here.
-
SwDevMan81 over 13 yearsThanks, this was exactly what I was looking for
-
Mark Wilkins over 13 years@SwDevMan81, The reason I looked is because I have wanted to do this in the past and never knew how. But your question prompted my brain to remember that the call command could call a label in the batch file, which made me wonder if this trick would work. So I only just now learned this.
-
SwDevMan81 over 13 yearsYeah I definitely wont have thought of this. Looks like we both learned something new today :)
-
HiredMind over 10 yearsI think you also have to redirect error output to standard output to see everything.
-
Alexander Amelkin over 7 yearsIt's great, but there is a number of problems with this solution, especially if you're converting an existing script: * Utilities that detect redirection and behave differently (e.g.,
more
) will think they are run interactively * Positional variables that contain arguments to the script will not be available after thecall
unless you explicitlycall :testitout %*
May be there are more. The first one is currently driving me nuts... Anyone got a solution for that? I can't think of anything better than runningmore /p >&2
when redirecting ascall :testitout >t.tmp 2>&1
.