Patent Publication Number: US-7587670-B2

Title: Mechanism for providing data driven command line output

Description:
RELATED APPLICATIONS 
   This is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/693,589, filed Oct. 24, 2003. 

   TECHNICAL FIELD 
   Subject matter disclosed herein relates to command line environments, and in particular to the output of commands entered via a command line environment. 
   BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
   Many operating systems provide a mechanism for “stitching” (i.e., pipelining) multiple applications (e.g., utilities) together to create a custom, ad hoc command that can be entered on a command line of the operating system. Typically, the commands are used in system administration tools, such as for managing system properties. Each of the “pipelined” utilities in the command communicate with each other by transferring text. Thus, each utility in the pipeline is responsible for parsing text that is received and for formatting text that is output. 
   The formatting of the text that is output is performed by code within the command and is, typically, based on interpreting switches provided on the command line for the command. Thus, each command is responsible for formatting and displaying the output, as desired. 
   Therefore, there is a need for a mechanism that provides enhanced formatting options and does not require extensive code within the command in order to provide the enhanced formatting options. 
   SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
   The present mechanism provides a data driven command line output within an environment that supports a pipeline of object-based commands. Each object-based command inputs a parseable object for processing and outputs another parseable object for subsequent command processing. The mechanism is operative to direct formatting and subsequent processing of the commands based on a type of the incoming parseable object. Format information is obtained for the type, such as shape, properties to display, and the like. The format information may be specified within an XML-based document. The mechanism utilizes one or more output processing commands, such as format commands, markup commands, convert commands, transform commands, and out commands. These output processing commands may be arranged within the pipeline in various ways to achieve the desired output results. 

   
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       FIG. 1  illustrates an exemplary computing device that may use an exemplary administrative tool environment. 
       FIG. 2  is a block diagram generally illustrating an overview of an exemplary administrative tool framework for the present administrative tool environment. 
       FIG. 3  is a block diagram illustrating components within the host-specific components of the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 4  is a block diagram illustrating components within the core engine component of the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 5  is one exemplary data structure for specifying a cmdlet suitable for use within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 6  is an exemplary data structure for specifying a command base type from which a cmdlet shown in  FIG. 5  is derived. 
       FIG. 7  is another exemplary data structure for specifying a cmdlet suitable for use within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 8  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for host processing that is performed within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 9  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for handling input that is performed within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 10  is a logical flow diagram illustrating a process for processing scripts suitable for use within the process for handling input shown in  FIG. 9 . 
       FIG. 11  is a logical flow diagram illustrating a script pre-processing process suitable for use within the script processing process shown in  FIG. 10 . 
       FIG. 12  is a logical flow diagram illustrating a process for applying constraints suitable for use within the script processing process shown in  FIG. 10 . 
       FIG. 13  is a functional flow diagram illustrating the processing of a command string in the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 14  is a logical flow diagram illustrating a process for processing commands strings suitable for use within the process for handling input shown in  FIG. 9 . 
       FIG. 15  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for creating an instance of a cmdlet suitable for use within the processing of command strings shown in  FIG. 14 . 
       FIG. 16  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for populating properties of a cmdlet suitable for use within the processing of commands shown in  FIG. 14 . 
       FIG. 17  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for executing the cmdlet suitable for use within the processing of commands shown in  FIG. 14 . 
       FIG. 18  is a functional block diagram of an exemplary extended type manager suitable for use within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 19  graphically depicts exemplary sequences for output processing cmdlets within a pipeline. 
       FIG. 20  illustrates exemplary processing performed by one of the output processing cmdlets shown in  FIG. 19 . 
       FIG. 21  graphically depicts an exemplary structure for display information accessed during the processing of  FIG. 20 . 
       FIG. 22  is a table listing an exemplary syntax for exemplary output processing cmdlets. 
       FIG. 23  illustrates results rendered by the out/console cmdlet using various pipeline sequences of the output processing cmdlets. 
   

   DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
   Briefly stated, the present mechanism provides a data driven command line output. A plurality of output processing cmdlets may be pipelined in various sequences to provide a desired output result. The output processing cmdlets include format cmdlets, markup cmdlets, convert cmdlets, transform cmdlets, and out cmdlets. Display information is populated with formatting options for a type of object. The mechanism is operative to direct formatting and subsequent cmdlet processing based on the type of incoming structured data (e.g., object). 
   The following description sets forth a specific exemplary administrative tool environment in which the mechanism operates. Other exemplary environments may include features of this specific embodiment and/or other features, which aim to facilitate outputting of formatted command line data. 
   The following detailed description is divided into several sections. A first section describes an illustrative computing environment in which the administrative tool environment may operate. A second section describes an exemplary framework for the administrative tool environment. Subsequent sections describe individual components of the exemplary framework and the operation of these components. For example, the section on “Exemplary Process for Displaying Command Line Data”, in conjunction with  FIGS. 19-23 , describes an exemplary mechanism for providing data driven command line output. 
   Exemplary Computing Environment 
     FIG. 1  illustrates an exemplary computing device that may be used in an exemplary administrative tool environment. In a very basic configuration, computing device  100  typically includes at least one processing unit  102  and system memory  104 . Depending on the exact configuration and type of computing device, system memory  104  may be volatile (such as RAM), nonvolatile (such as ROM, flash memory, etc.) or some combination of the two. System memory  104  typically includes an operating system  105 , one or more program modules  106 , and may include program data  107 . The operating system  106  include a component-based framework  120  that supports components (including properties and events), objects, inheritance, polymorphism, reflection, and provides an object-oriented component-based application programming interface (API), such as that of the .NET™ Framework manufactured by Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Wash. The operating system  105  also includes an administrative tool framework  200  that interacts with the component-based framework  120  to support development of administrative tools (not shown). This basic configuration is illustrated in  FIG. 1  by those components within dashed line  108 . 
   Computing device  100  may have additional features or functionality. For example, computing device  100  may also include additional data storage devices  11  (removable and/or non-removable) such as, for example, magnetic disks, optical disks, or tape. Such additional storage is illustrated in  FIG. 1  by removable storage  109  and non-removable storage  110 . Computer storage media may include volatile and nonvolatile, removable and non-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information, such as computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data. System memory  104 , removable storage  109  and non-removable storage  110  are all examples of computer storage media. Computer storage media includes, but is not limited to, RAM, ROM, EEPROM, flash memory or other memory technology, CD-ROM, digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store the desired information and which can be accessed by computing device  100 . Any such computer storage media may be part of device  100 . Computing device  100  may also have input device(s)  112  such as keyboard, mouse, pen, voice input device, touch input device, etc. Output device(s)  114  such as a display, speakers, printer, etc. may also be included. These devices are well know in the art and need not be discussed at length here. 
   Computing device  100  may also contain communication connections  116  that allow the device to communicate with other computing devices  118 , such as over a network. Communication connections  116  are one example of communication media. Communication media may typically be embodied by computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data in a modulated data signal, such as a carrier wave or other transport mechanism, and includes any information delivery media. The term “modulated data signal” means a signal that has one or more of its characteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encode information in the signal. By way of example, and not limitation, communication media includes wired media such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media such as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media. The term computer readable media as used herein includes both storage media and communication media. 
   Exemplary Administrative Tool Framework 
     FIG. 2  is a block diagram generally illustrating an overview of an exemplary administrative tool framework  200 . Administrative tool framework  200  includes one or more host components  202 , host-specific components  204 , host-independent components  206 , and handler components  208 . The host-independent components  206  may communicate with each of the other components (i.e., the host components  202 , the host-specific components  204 , and the handler components  208 ). Each of these components are briefly described below and described in further detail, as needed, in subsequent sections. 
   Host Components 
   The host components  202  include one or more host programs (e.g., host programs  210 - 214 ) that expose automation features for an associated application to users or to other programs. Each host program  210 - 214  may expose these automation features in its own particular style, such as via a command line, a graphical user interface (GUI), a voice recognition interface, application programming interface (API), a scripting language, a web service, and the like. However, each of the host programs  210 - 214  expose the one or more automation features through a mechanism provided by the administrative tool framework. 
   In this example, the mechanism uses cmdlets to surface the administrative tool capabilities to a user of the associated host program  210 - 214 . In addition, the mechanism uses a set of interfaces made available by the host to embed the administrative tool environment within the application associated with the corresponding host program  210 - 214 . Throughout the following discussion, the term “cmdlet” is used to refer to commands that are used within the exemplary administrative tool environment described with reference to  FIGS. 2-23 . 
   Cmdlets correspond to commands in traditional administrative environments. However, cmdlets are quite different than these traditional commands. For example, cmdlets are typically smaller in size than their counterpart commands because the cmdlets can utilize common functions provided by the administrative tool framework, such as parsing, data validation, error reporting, and the like. Because such common functions can be implemented once and tested once, the use of cmdlets throughout the administrative tool framework allows the incremental development and test costs associated with application-specific functions to be quite low compared to traditional environments. 
   In addition, in contrast to traditional environments, cmdlets do not need to be stand-alone executable programs. Rather, cmdlets may run in the same processes within the administrative tool framework. This allows cmdlets to exchange “live” objects between each other. This ability to exchange “live” objects allows the cmdlets to directly invoke methods on these objects. The details for creating and using cmdlets are described in further detail below. 
   In overview, each host program  210 - 214  manages the interactions between the user and the other components within the administrative tool framework. These interactions may include prompts for parameters, reports of errors, and the like. Typically, each host program  210 - 213  may provide its own set of specific host cmdlets (e.g., host cmdlets  218 ). For example, if the host program is an email program, the host program may provide host cmdlets that interact with mailboxes and messages. Even though  FIG. 2  illustrates host programs  210 - 214 , one skilled in the art will appreciate that host components  202  may include other host programs associated with existing or newly created applications. These other host programs will also embed the functionality provided by the administrative tool environment within their associated application. The processing provided by a host program is described in detail below in conjunction with  FIG. 8 . 
   In the examples illustrated in  FIG. 2 , a host program may be a management console (i.e., host program  210 ) that provides a simple, consistent, administration user interface for users to create, save, and open administrative tools that manage the hardware, software, and network components of the computing device. To accomplish these functions, host program  210  provides a set of services for building management GUIs on top of the administrative tool framework. The GUI interactions may also be exposed as user-visible scripts that help teach the users the scripting capabilities provided by the administrative tool environment. 
   In another example, the host program may be a command line interactive shell (i.e., host program  212 ). The command line interactive shell may allow shell metadata  216  to be input on the command line to affect processing of the command line. 
   In still another example, the host program may be a web service (i.e., host program  214 ) that uses industry standard specifications for distributed computing and interoperability across platforms, programming languages, and applications. 
   In addition to these examples, third parties may add their own host components by creating “third party” or “provider” interfaces and provider cmdlets that are used with their host program or other host programs. The provider interface exposes an application or infrastructure so that the application or infrastructure can be manipulated by the administrative tool framework. The provider cmdlets provide automation for navigation, diagnostics, configuration, lifecycle, operations, and the like. The provider cmdlets exhibit polymorphic cmdlet behavior on a completely heterogeneous set of data stores. The administrative tool environment operates on the provider cmdlets with the same priority as other cmdlet classes. The provider cmdlet is created using the same mechanisms as the other cmdlets. The provider cmdlets expose specific functionality of an application or an infrastructure to the administrative tool framework. Thus, through the use of cmdlets, product developers need only create one host component that will then allow their product to operate with many administrative tools. For example, with the exemplary administrative tool environment, system level graphical user interface help menus may be integrated and ported to existing applications. 
   Host-Specific Components 
   The host-specific components  204  include a collection of services that computing systems (e.g., computing device  100  in  FIG. 1 ) use to isolate the administrative tool framework from the specifics of the platform on which the framework is running. Thus, there is a set of host-specific components for each type of platform. The host-specific components allow the users to use the same administrative tools on different operating systems. 
   Turning briefly to  FIG. 3 , the host-specific components  204  may include an intellisense/metadata access component  302 , a help cmdlet component  304 , a configuration/registration component  306 , a cmdlet setup component  308 , and an output interface component  309  Components  302 - 308  communicate with a database store manager  312  associated with a database store  314 . The parser  220  and script engine  222  communicate with the intellisense/metadata access component  302 . The core engine  224  communicates with the help cmdlet component  304 , the configuration/registration component  306 , the cmdlet setup component  308 , and the output interface component  309 . The output interface component  309  includes interfaces provided by the host to out cmdlets. These out cmdlets can then call the host&#39;s output object to perform the rendering. Host-specific components  204  may also include a logging/auditing component  310 , which the core engine  224  uses to communicate with host specific (i.e., platform specific) services that provide logging and auditing capabilities. 
   In one exemplary administrative tool framework, the intellisense/metadata access component  302  provides auto-completion of commands, parameters, and parameter values. The help cmdlet component  304  provides a customized help system based on a host user interface. 
   Handler Components 
   Referring back to  FIG. 2 , the handler components  208  includes legacy utilities  230 , management cmdlets  232 , non-management cmdlets  234 , remoting cmdlets  236 , and a web service interface  238 . The management cmdlets  232  (also referred to as platform cmdlets) include cmdlets that query or manipulate the configuration information associated with the computing device. Because management cmdlets  232  manipulate system type information, they are dependant upon a particular platform. However, each platform typically has management cmdlets  232  that provide similar actions as management cmdlets  232  on other platforms. For example, each platform supports management cmdlets  232  that get and set system administrative attributes (e.g., get/process, set/IPAddress). The host-independent components  206  communicate with the management cmdlets via cmdlet objects generated within the host-independent components  206 . Exemplary data structures for cmdlets objects will be described in detail below in conjunction with  FIGS. 5-7 . 
   The non-management cmdlets  234  (sometimes referred to as base cmdlets) include cmdlets that group, sort, filter, and perform other processing on objects provided by the management cmdlets  232 . The non-management cmdlets  234  may also include cmdlets for formatting and outputting data associated with the pipelined objects. An exemplary mechanism for providing a data driven command line output is described below in conjunction with  FIGS. 19-23 . The non-management cmdlets  234  may be the same on each platform and provide a set of utilities that interact with host-independent components  206  via cmdlet objects. The interactions between the non-management cmdlets  234  and the host-independent components  206  allow reflection on objects and allow processing on the reflected objects independent of their (object) type. Thus, these utilities allow developers to write non-management cmdlets once and then apply these non-management cmdlets across all classes of objects supported on a computing system. In the past, developers had to first comprehend the format of the data that was to be processed and then write the application to process only that data. As a consequence, traditional applications could only process data of a very limited scope. One exemplary mechanism for processing objects independent of their object type is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 18 . 
   The legacy utilities  230  include existing executables, such as win32 executables that run under cmd.exe. Each legacy utility  230  communicates with the administrative tool framework using text streams (i.e., stdin and stdout), which are a type of object within the object framework. Because the legacy utilities  230  utilize text streams, reflection-based operations provided by the administrative tool framework are not available. The legacy utilities  230  execute in a different process than the administrative tool framework. Although not shown, other cmdlets may also operate out of process. 
   The remoting cmdlets  236 , in combination with the web service interface  238 , provide remoting mechanisms to access interactive and programmatic administrative tool environments on other computing devices over a communication media, such as internet or intranet (e.g., internet/intranet  240  shown in  FIG. 2 ). In one exemplary administrative tool framework, the remoting mechanisms support federated services that depend on infrastructure that spans multiple independent control domains. The remoting mechanism allows scripts to execute on remote computing devices. The scripts may be run on a single or on multiple remote systems. The results of the scripts may be processed as each individual script completes or the results may be aggregated and processed en-masse after all the scripts on the various computing devices have completed. 
   For example, web service  214  shown as one of the host components  202  may be a remote agent. The remote agent handles the submission of remote command requests to the parser and administrative tool framework on the target system. The remoting cmdlets serve as the remote client to provide access to the remote agent. The remote agent and the remoting cmdlets communicate via a parsed stream. This parsed stream may be protected at the protocol layer, or additional cmdlets may be used to encrypt and then decrypt the parsed stream. 
   Host-Independent Components 
   The host-independent components  206  include a parser  220 , a script engine  222  and a core engine  224 . The host-independent components  206  provide mechanisms and services to group multiple cmdlets, coordinate the operation of the cmdlets, and coordinate the interaction of other resources, sessions, and jobs with the cmdlets. 
   Exemplary Parser 
   The parser  220  provides mechanisms for receiving input requests from various host programs and mapping the input requests to uniform cmdlet objects that are used throughout the administrative tool framework, such as within the core engine  224 . In addition, the parser  220  may perform data processing based on the input received. One exemplary method for performing data processing based on the input is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 12 . The parser  220  of the present administrative tool framework provides the capability to easily expose different languages or syntax to users for the same capabilities. For example, because the parser  220  is responsible for interpreting the input requests, a change to the code within the parser  220  that affects the expected input syntax will essentially affect each user of the administrative tool framework. Therefore, system administrators may provide different parsers on different computing devices that support different syntax. However, each user operating with the same parser will experience a consistent syntax for each cmdlet. In contrast, in traditional environments, each command implemented its own syntax. Thus, with thousands of commands, each environment supported several different syntax, usually many of which were inconsistent with each other. 
   Exemplary Script Engine 
   The script engine  222  provides mechanisms and services to tie multiple cmdlets together using a script. A script is an aggregation of command lines that share session state under strict rules of inheritance. The multiple command lines within the script may be executed either synchronously or asynchronously, based on the syntax provided in the input request. The script engine  222  has the ability to process control structures, such as loops and conditional clauses and to process variables within the script. The script engine also manages session state and gives cmdlets access to session data based on a policy (not shown). 
   Exemplary Core Engine 
   The core engine  224  is responsible for processing cmdlets identified by the parser  220 . Turning briefly to  FIG. 4 , an exemplary core engine  224  within the administrative tool framework  200  is illustrated. The exemplary core engine  224  includes a pipeline processor  402 , a loader  404 , a metadata processor  406 , an error &amp; event handler  408 , a session manager  410 , and an extended type manager  412 . 
   Exemplary Metadata Processor 
   The metadata processor  406  is configured to access and store metadata within a metadata store, such as database store  314  shown in  FIG. 3 . The metadata may be supplied via the command line, within a cmdlet class definition, and the like. Different components within the administrative tool framework  200  may request the metadata when performing their processing. For example, parser  202  may request metadata to validate parameters supplied on the command line. 
   Exemplary Error &amp; Event Processor 
   The error &amp; event processor  408  provides an error object to store information about each occurrence of an error during processing of a command line. For additional information about one particular error and event processor which is particularly suited for the present administrative tool framework, refer to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/413,054, entitled “System and Method for Persisting Error Information in a Command Line Environment”, which is owned by the same assignee as the present invention, and is incorporated here by reference. 
   Exemplary Session Manager 
   The session manager  410  supplies session and state information to other components within the administrative tool framework  200 . The state information managed by the session manager may be accessed by any cmdlet, host, or core engine via programming interfaces. These programming interfaces allow for the creation, modification, and deletion of state information. 
   Exemplary Pipeline Processor and Loader 
   The loader  404  is configured to load each cmdlet in memory in order for the pipeline processor  402  to execute the cmdlet. The pipeline processor  402  includes a cmdlet processor  420  and a cmdlet manager  422 . The cmdlet processor  420  dispatches individual cmdlets. If the cmdlet requires execution on a remote, or a set of remote machines, the cmdlet processor  420  coordinates the execution with the remoting cmdlet  236  shown in  FIG. 2 . The cmdlet manager  422  handles the execution of aggregations of cmdlets. The cmdlet manager  422 , the cmdlet processor  420 , and the script engine  222  ( FIG. 2 ) communicate with each other in order to perform the processing on the input received from the host program  210 - 214 . The communication may be recursive in nature. For example, if the host program provides a script, the script may invoke the cmdlet manager  422  to execute a cmdlet, which itself may be a script. The script may then be executed by the script engine  222 . One exemplary process flow for the core engine is described in detail below in conjunction with  FIG. 14 . 
   Exemplary Extended Type Manager 
   As mentioned above, the administrative tool framework provides a set of utilities that allows reflection on objects and allows processing on the reflected objects independent of their (object) type. The administrative tool framework  200  interacts with the component framework on the computing system (component framework  120  in  FIG. 1 ) to perform this reflection. As one skilled in the art will appreciate, reflection provides the ability to query an object and to obtain a type for the object, and then reflect on various objects and properties associated with that type of object to obtain other objects and/or a desired value. 
   Even though reflection provides the administrative tool framework  200  a considerable amount of information on objects, the inventors appreciated that reflection focuses on the type of object. For example, when a database datatable is reflected upon, the information that is returned is that the datatable has two properties: a column property and a row property. These two properties do not provide sufficient detail regarding the “objects” within the datatable. Similar problems arise when reflection is used on extensible markup language (XML) and other objects. 
   Thus, the inventors conceived of an extended type manager  412  that focuses on the usage of the type. For this extended type manager, the type of object is not important. Instead, the extended type manager is interested in whether the object can be used to obtain required information. Continuing with the above datatable example, the inventors appreciated that knowing that the datatable has a column property and a row property is not particularly interesting, but appreciated that one column contained information of interest. Focusing on the usage, one could associate each row with an “object” and associate each column with a “property” of that “object”. Thus, the extended type manager  412  provides a mechanism to create “objects” from any type of precisely parse-able input. In so doing, the extended type manager  412  supplements the reflection capabilities provided by the component-based framework  120  and extends “reflection” to any type of precisely parse-able input. 
   In overview, the extended type manager is configured to access precisely parse-able input (not shown) and to correlate the precisely parse-able input with a requested data type. The extended type manager  412  then provides the requested information to the requesting component, such as the pipeline processor  402  or parser  220 . In the following discussion, precisely parse-able input is defined as input in which properties and values may be discerned. Some exemplary precisely parse-able input include Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) input, ActiveX Data Objects (ADO) input, eXtensible Markup Language (XML) input, and object input, such as .NET objects. Other precisely parse-able input may include third party data formats. 
   Turning briefly to  FIG. 18 , a functional block diagram of an exemplary extended type manager for use within the administrative tool framework is shown. For explanation purposes, the functionality (denoted by the number “ 3 ” within a circle) provided by the extended type manager is contrasted with the functionality provided by a traditional tightly bound system (denoted by the number “ 1 ” within a circle) and the functionality provided by a reflection system (denoted by the number “ 2 ” within a circle). In the traditional tightly bound system, a caller  1802  within an application directly accesses the information (e.g., properties P 1  and P 2 , methods M 1  and M 2 ) within object A. As mentioned above, the caller  1802  must know, a priori, the properties (e.g., properties P 1  and P 2 ) and methods (e.g., methods M 1  and M 2 ) provided by object A at compile time. In the reflection system, generic code  1820  (not dependent on any data type) queries a system  1808  that performs reflection  1810  on the requested object and returns the information (e.g., properties P 1  and P 2 , methods M 1  and M 2 ) about the object (e.g., object A) to the generic code  1820 . Although not shown in object A, the returned information may include additional information, such as vendor, file, date, and the like. Thus, through reflection, the generic code  1820  obtains at least the same information that the tightly bound system provides. The reflection system also allows the caller  1802  to query the system and get additional information without any a priori knowledge of the parameters. 
   In both the tightly bound systems and the reflection systems, new data types can not be easily incorporated within the operating environment. For example, in a tightly bound system, once the operating environment is delivered, the operating environment can not incorporate new data types because it would have to be rebuilt in order to support them. Likewise, in reflection systems, the metadata for each object class is fixed. Thus, incorporating new data types is not usually done. 
   However, with the present extended type manager new data types can be incorporated into the operating system. With the extended type manager  1822 , generic code  1820  may reflect on a requested object to obtain extended data types (e.g., object A′) provided by various external sources, such as a third party objects (e.g., object A′ and B), a semantic web  1832 , an ontology service  1834 , and the like. As shown, the third party object may extend an existing object (e.g., object A′) or may create an entirely new object (e.g., object B). 
   Each of these external sources may register their unique structure within a type metadata  1840  and may provide code  1842 . When an object is queried, the extended type manager reviews the type metadata  1840  to determine whether the object has been registered. If the object is not registered within the type metadata  1840 , reflection is performed. Otherwise, extended reflection is performed. The code  1842  returns the additional properties and methods associated with the type being reflected upon. For example, if the input type is XML, the code  1842  may include a description file that describes the manner in which the XML is used to create the objects from the XML document. Thus, the type metadata  1840  describes how the extended type manager  412  should query various types of precisely parse-able input (e.g., third party objects A′ and B, semantic web  1832 ) to obtain the desired properties for creating an object for that specific input type and the code  1842  provides the instructions to obtain these desired properties. As a result, the extended type manager  412  provides a layer of indirection that allows “reflection” on all types of objects. 
   In addition to providing extended types, the extend type manager  412  provides additional query mechanisms, such as a property path mechanism, a key mechanism, a compare mechanism, a conversion mechanism, a globber mechanism, a property set mechanism, a relationship mechanism, and the like. Each of these query mechanisms, described below in the section “Exemplary Extended Type Manager Processing”, provides flexibility to system administrators when entering command strings. Various techniques may be used to implement the semantics for the extended type manager. Three techniques are described below. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that variations of these techniques may be used without departing from the scope of the claimed invention. 
   In one technique, a series of classes having static methods (e.g., getproperty( )) may be provided. An object is input into the static method (e.g., getproperty(object)), and the static method returns a set of results. In another technique, the operating environment envelopes the object with an adapter. Thus, no input is supplied. Each instance of the adapter has a getproperty method that acts upon the enveloped object and returns the properties for the enveloped object. The following is pseudo code illustrating this technique: 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               Class Adaptor 
             
             
                 
               { 
             
             
                 
                 Object X; 
             
             
                 
                 getProperties( ); 
             
             
                 
               }. 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   In still another technique, an adaptor class subclasses the object. Traditionally, subclassing occurred before compilation. However, with certain operating environments, subclassing may occur dynamically. For these types of environments, the following is pseudo code illustrating this technique: 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               Class Adaptor : A 
             
             
                 
               { 
             
             
                 
                 getProperties( ) 
             
             
                 
                 { 
             
             
                 
                   return data; 
             
             
                 
                 } 
             
             
                 
               }. 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   Thus, as illustrated in  FIG. 18 , the extended type manager allows developers to create a new data type, register the data type, and allow other applications and cmdlets to use the new data type. In contrast, in prior administrative environments, each data type had to be known at compile time so that a property or method associated with an object instantiated from that data type could be directly accessed. Therefore, adding new data types that were supported by the administrative environment was seldom done in the past. 
   Referring back to  FIG. 2 , in overview, the administrative tool framework  200  does not rely on the shell for coordinating the execution of commands input by users, but rather, splits the functionality into processing portions (e.g., host-independent components  206 ) and user interaction portions (e.g., via host cmdlets). In addition, the present administrative tool environment greatly simplifies the programming of administrative tools because the code required for parsing and data validation is no longer included within each command, but is rather provided by components (e.g., parser  220 ) within the administrative tool framework. The exemplary processing performed within the administrative tool framework is described below. 
   Exemplary Operation 
     FIGS. 5-7  graphically illustrate exemplary data structures used within the administrative tool environment.  FIGS. 8-17  graphically illustrate exemplary processing flows within the administrative tool environment. One skilled in the art will appreciate that certain processing may be performed by a different component than the component described below without departing from the scope of the present invention. Before describing the processing performed within the components of the administrative tool framework, exemplary data structures used within the administrative tool framework are described. 
   Exemplary Data Structures for Cmdlet Objects 
     FIG. 5  is an exemplary data structure for specifying a cmdlet suitable for use within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . When completed, the cmdlet may be a management cmdlet, a non-management cmdlet, a host cmdlet, a provider cmdlet, or the like. The following discussion describes the creation of a cmdlet with respect to a system administrator&#39;s perspective (i.e., a provider cmdlet). However, each type of cmdlet is created in the same manner and operates in a similar manner. A cmdlet may be written in any language, such as C#. In addition, the cmdlet may be written using a scripting language or the like. When the administrative tool environment operates with the .NET Framework, the cmdlet may be a .NET object. 
   The provider cmdlet  500  (hereinafter, referred to as cmdlet  500 ) is a public class having a cmdlet class name (e.g., StopProcess  504 ). Cmdlet  500  derives from a cmdlet class  506 . An exemplary data structure for a cmdlet class  506  is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 6 . Each cmdlet  500  is associated with a command attribute  502  that associates a name (e.g., Stop/Process) with the cmdlet  500 . The name is registered within the administrative tool environment. As will be described below, the parser looks in the cmdlet registry to identify the cmdlet  500  when a command string having the name (e.g., Stop/Process) is supplied as input on a command line or in a script. 
   The cmdlet  500  is associated with a grammar mechanism that defines a grammar for expected input parameters to the cmdlet. The grammar mechanism may be directly or indirectly associated with the cmdlet. For example, the cmdlet  500  illustrates a direct grammar association. In this cmdlet  500 , one or more public parameters (e.g., ProcessName  510  and PID  512 ) are declared. The declaration of the public parameters drives the parsing of the input objects to the cmdlet  500 . Alternatively, the description of the parameters may appear in an external source, such as an XML document. The description of the parameters in this external source would then drive the parsing of the input objects to the cmdlet. 
   Each public parameter  510 ,  512  may have one or more attributes (i.e., directives) associated with it. The directives may be from any of the following categories: parsing directive  521 , data validation directive  522 , data generation directive  523 , processing directive  524 , encoding directive  525 , and documentation directive  526 . The directives may be surrounded by square brackets. Each directive describes an operation to be performed on the following expected input parameter. Some of the directives may also be applied at a class level, such as user-interaction type directives. The directives are stored in the metadata associated with the cmdlet. The application of these attributes is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 12 . 
   These attributes may also affect the population of the parameters declared within the cmdlet. One exemplary process for populating these parameters is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 16 . The core engine may apply these directives to ensure compliance. The cmdlet  500  includes a first method  530  (hereinafter, interchangeably referred to as StartProcessing method  530 ) and a second method  540  (hereinafter, interchangeably referred to as processRecord method  540 ). The core engine uses the first and second methods  530 ,  540  to direct the processing of the cmdlet  500 . For example, the first method  530  is executed once and performs set-up functions. The code  542  within the second method  540  is executed for each object (e.g., record) that needs to be processed by the cmdlet  500 . The cmdlet  500  may also include a third method (not shown) that cleans up after the cmdlet  500 . 
   Thus, as shown in  FIG. 5 , code  542  within the second method  540  is typically quite brief and does not contain functionality required in traditional administrative tool environments, such as parsing code, data validation code, and the like. Thus, system administrators can develop complex administrative tasks without learning a complex programming language. 
     FIG. 6  is an exemplary data structure  600  for specifying a cmdlet base class  602  from which the cmdlet shown in  FIG. 5  is derived. The cmdlet base class  602  includes instructions that provide additional functionality whenever the cmdlet includes a hook statement and a corresponding switch is input on the command line or in the script (jointly referred to as command input). 
   The exemplary data structure  600  includes parameters, such as Boolean parameter verbose  610 , whatif  620 , and confirm  630 . As will be explained below, these parameters correspond to strings that may be entered on the command input. The exemplary data structure  600  may also include a security method  640  that determines whether the task being requested for execution is allowed. 
     FIG. 7  is another exemplary data structure  700  for specifying a cmdlet. In overview, the data structure  700  provides a means for clearly expressing a contract between the administrative tool framework and the cmdlet. Similar to data structure  500 , data structure  700  is a public class that derives from a cmdlet class  704 . The software developer specifies a cmdletDeclaration  702  that associates a noun/verb pair, such as “get/process” and “format/table”, with the cmdlet  700 . The noun/verb pair is registered within the administrative tool environment. The verb or the noun may be implicit in the cmdlet name. Also, similar to data structure  500 , data structure  700  may include one or more public members (e.g., Name  730 , Recurse  732 ), which may be associated with the one or more directives  520 - 526  described in conjunction with data structure  500 . 
   However, in this exemplary data structure  700 , each of the expected input parameters  730  and  732  is associated with an input attribute  731  and  733 , respectively. The input attributes  731  and  733  specifying that the data for its respective parameter  730  and  732  should be obtained from the command line. Thus, in this exemplary data structure  700 , there are not any expected input parameters that are populated from a pipelined object that has been emitted by another cmdlet. Thus, data structure  700  does not override the first method (e.g., StartProcessing) or the second method (e.g., ProcessRecord) which are provided by the cmdlet base class. 
   The data structure  700  may also include a private member  740  that is not recognized as an input parameter. The private member  740  may be used for storing data that is generated based on one of the directives. 
   Thus, as illustrated in data structure  700 , through the use of declaring public properties and directives within a specific cmdlet class, cmdlet developers can easily specify a grammar for the expected input parameters to their cmdlets and specify processing that should be performed on the expected input parameters without requiring the cmdlet developers to generate any of the underlying logic. Data structure  700  illustrates a direct association between the cmdlet and the grammar mechanism. As mentioned above, this associated may also be indirect, such as by specifying the expected parameter definitions within an external source, such as an XML document. 
   The exemplary process flows within the administrative tool environment are now described. 
   Exemplary Host Processing Flow 
     FIG. 8  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for host processing that is performed within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . The process  800  begins at block  801 , where a request has been received to initiate the administrative tool environment for a specific application. The request may have been sent locally through keyboard input, such as selecting an application icon, or remotely through the web services interface of a different computing device. For either scenario, processing continues to block  802 . 
   At block  802 , the specific application (e.g., host program) on the “target” computing device sets up its environment. This includes determining which subsets of cmdlets (e.g., management cmdlets  232 , non-management cmdlets  234 , and host cmdlets  218 ) are made available to the user. Typically, the host program will make all the non-management cmdlets  234  available and its own host cmdlets  218  available. In addition, the host program will make a subset of the management cmdlets  234  available, such as cmdlets dealing with processes, disk, and the like. Thus, once the host program makes the subsets of cmdlets available, the administrative tool framework is effectively embedded within the corresponding application. Processing continues to block  804 . 
   At block  804 , input is obtained through the specific application. As mentioned above, input may take several forms, such as command lines, scripts, voice, GUI, and the like. For example, when input is obtained via a command line, the input is retrieve from the keystrokes entered on a keyboard. For a GUI host, a string is composed based on the GUI. Processing continues at block  806 . 
   At block  806 , the input is provided to other components within the administrative tool framework for processing. The host program may forward the input directly to the other components, such as the parser. Alternatively, the host program may forward the input via one of its host cmdlets. The host cmdlet may convert its specific type of input (e.g., voice) into a type of input (e.g., text string, script) that is recognized by the administrative tool framework. For example, voice input may be converted to a script or command line string depending on the content of the voice input. Because each host program is responsible for converting their type of input to an input recognized by the administrative tool framework, the administrative tool framework can accept input from any number of various host components. In addition, the administrative tool framework provides a rich set of utilities that perform conversions between data types when the input is forwarded via one of its cmdlets. Processing performed on the input by the other components is described below in conjunction with several other figures. Host processing continues at decision block  808 . 
   At decision block  808 , a determination is made whether a request was received for additional input. This may occur if one of the other components responsible for processing the input needs additional information from the user in order to complete its processing. For example, a password may be required to access certain data, confirmation of specific actions may be needed, and the like. For certain types of host programs (e.g., voice mail), a request such as this may not be appropriate. Thus, instead of querying the user for additional information, the host program may serialize the state, suspend the state, and send a notification so that at a later time the state may be resumed and the execution of the input be continued. In another variation, the host program may provide a default value after a predetermined time period. If a request for additional input is received, processing loops back to block  804 , where the additional input is obtained. Processing then continues through blocks  806  and  808  as described above. If no request for additional input is received and the input has been processed, processing continues to block  810 . 
   At block  810 , results are received from other components within the administrative tool framework. The results may include error messages, status, and the like. The results are in an object form, which is recognized and processed by the host cmdlet within the administrative tool framework. As will be described below, the code written for each host cmdlet is very minimal. Thus, a rich set of output may be displayed without requiring a huge investment in development costs. Processing continues at block  812 . 
   At block  812 , the results may be viewed. The host cmdlet converts the results to the display style supported by the host program. For example, a returned object may be displayed by a GUI host program using a graphical depiction, such as an icon, barking dog, and the like. The host cmdlet provides a default format and output for the data. The default format and output may utilize the exemplary output processing cmdlets described below in conjunction with  FIGS. 19-23 . After the results are optionally displayed, the host processing is complete. 
   Exemplary Process Flows for Handling Input 
     FIG. 9  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for handling input that is performed within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . Processing begins at block  901  where input has been entered via a host program and forwarded to other components within the administrative tool framework. Processing continues at block  902 . 
   At block  902 , the input is received from the host program. In one exemplary administrative tool framework, the input is received by the parser, which deciphers the input and directs the input for further processing. Processing continues at decision block  904 . 
   At decision block  904 , a determination is made whether the input is a script. The input may take the form of a script or a string representing a command line (hereinafter, referred to as a “command string”). The command string may represent one or more cmdlets pipelined together. Even though the administrative tool framework supports several different hosts, each host provides the input as either a script or a command string for processing. As will be shown below, the interaction between scripts and command strings is recursive in nature. For example, a script may have a line that invokes a cmdlet. The cmdlet itself may be a script. 
   Thus, at decision block  904 , if the input is in a form of a script, processing continues at block  906 , where processing of the script is performed. Otherwise, processing continues at block  908 , where processing of the command string is performed. Once the processing performed within either block  906  or  908  is completed, processing of the input is complete. 
   Exemplary Processing of Scripts 
     FIG. 10  is a logical flow diagram illustrating a process for processing a script suitable for use within the process for handling input shown in  FIG. 9 . The process begins at block  1001 , where the input has been identified as a script. The script engine and parser communicate with each other to perform the following functions. Processing continues at block  1002 . 
   At block  1002 , pre-processing is performed on the script. Briefly, turning to  FIG. 11 , a logical flow diagram is shown that illustrates a script preprocessing process  1100  suitable for use within the script processing process  1000 . Script pre-processing begins at block  1101  and continues to decision block  1102 . 
   At decision block  1102 , a determination is made whether the script is being run for the first time. This determination may be based on information obtained from a registry or other storage mechanism. The script is identified from within the storage mechanism and the associated data is reviewed. If the script has not run previously, processing continues at block  1104 . 
   At block  1104 , the script is registered in the registry. This allows information about the script to be stored for later access by components within the administrative tool framework. Processing continues at block  1106 . 
   At block  1106 , help and documentation are extracted from the script and stored in the registry. Again, this information may be later accessed by components within the administrative tool framework. The script is now ready for processing and returns to block  1004  in  FIG. 10 . 
   Returning to decision block  1102 , if the process concludes that the script has run previously, processing continues to decision block  1108 . At decision block  1108 , a determination is made whether the script failed during processing. This information may be obtained from the registry. If the script has not failed, the script is ready for processing and returns to block  1004  in  FIG. 10 . 
   However, if the script has failed, processing continues at block  1110 . At block  1110 , the script engine may notify the user through the host program that the script has previously failed. This notification will allow a user to decide whether to proceed with the script or to exit the script. As mentioned above in conjunction with  FIG. 8 , the host program may handle this request in various ways depending on the style of input (e.g., voice, command line). Once additional input is received from the user, the script either returns to block  1004  in  FIG. 10  for processing or the script is aborted. 
   Returning to block  1004  in  FIG. 10 , a line from the script is retrieved. Processing continues at decision block  1006 . At decision block  1006 , a determination is made whether the line includes any constraints. A constraint is detected by a predefined begin character (e.g., a bracket “[”) and a corresponding end character (e.g., a close bracket “]”). If the line includes constraints, processing continues to block  1008 . 
   At block  1008 , the constraints included in the line are applied. In general, the constraints provide a mechanism within the administrative tool framework to specify a type for a parameter entered in the script and to specify validation logic which should be performed on the parameter. The constraints are not only applicable to parameters, but are also applicable to any type of construct entered in the script, such as variables. Thus, the constraints provide a mechanism within an interpretive environment to specify a data type and to validate parameters. In traditional environments, system administrators are unable to formally test parameters entered within a script. An exemplary process for applying constraints is illustrated in  FIG. 12 . 
   At decision block  1010 , a determination is made whether the line from the script includes built-in capabilities. Built-in capabilities are capabilities that are not performed by the core engine. Built-in capabilities may be processed using cmdlets or may be processed using other mechanisms, such as in-line functions. If the line does not have built-in capabilities, processing continues at decision block  1014 . Otherwise, processing continues at block  1012 . 
   At block  1012 , the built-in capabilities provided on the line of the script are processed. Example built-in capabilities may include execution of control structures, such as “if” statements, “for” loops, switches, and the like. Built-in capabilities may also include assignment type statements (e.g., a=3). Once the built-in capabilities have been processed, processing continues to decision block  1014 . 
   At decision block  1014 , a determination is made whether the line of the script includes a command string. The determination is based on whether the data on the line is associated with a command string that has been registered and with a syntax of the potential cmdlet invocation. As mentioned above, the processing of command strings and scripts may be recursive in nature because scripts may include command strings and command strings may execute a cmdlet that is a script itself. If the line does not include a command string, processing continues at decision block  1018 . Otherwise, processing continues at block  1016 . 
   At block  1016 , the command string is processed. In overview, the processing of the command string includes identifying a cmdlet class by the parser and passing the corresponding cmdlet object to the core engine for execution. The command string may also include a pipelined command string that is parsed into several individual cmdlet objects and individually processed by the core engine. One exemplary process for processing command strings is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 14 . Once the command string is processed, processing continues at decision block  1018 . 
   At decision block  1018 , a determination is made whether there is another line in the script. If there is another line in the script, processing loops back to block  1004  and proceeds as described above in blocks  1004 - 1016 . Otherwise, processing is complete. 
   An exemplary process for applying constraints in block  1008  is illustrated in  FIG. 12 . The process begins at block  1201  where a constraint is detected in the script or in the command string on the command line. When the constraint is within a script, the constraints and the associated construct may occur on the same line or on separate lines. When the constraint is within a command string, the constraint and the associated construct occur before the end of line indicator (e.g., enter key). Processing continues to block  1202 . 
   At block  1202 , constraints are obtained from the interpretive environment. In one exemplary administrative tool environment, the parser deciphers the input and determines the occurrence of constraints. Constraints may be from one of the following categories: predicate directive, parsing directive, data validation directive, data generation directive, processing directive, encoding directive, and documentation directive. In one exemplary parsing syntax, the directives are surrounded by square brackets and describe the construct that follows them. The construct may be a function, a variable, a script, or the like. 
   As will be described below, through the use of directives, script authors are allowed to easily type and perform processing on the parameters within the script or command line (i.e., an interpretive environment) without requiring the script authors to generate any of the underlying logic. Processing continues to block  1204 . 
   At block  1204 , the constraints that are obtained are stored in the metadata for the associated construct. The associated construct is identified as being the first non-attribution token after one or more attribution tokens (tokens that denote constraints) have been encountered. Processing continues to block  1206 . 
   At block  1206 , whenever the construct is encountered within the script or in the command string, the constraints defined within the metadata are applied to the construct. The constraints may include data type, predicate directives  1210 , documentation directives  1212 , parsing directives  1214 , data generation directives  1216 , data validation directives  1218 , and object processing and encoding directives  1220 . Constraints specifying data types may specify any data type supported by the system on which the administrative tool framework is running. Predicate directives  1210  are directives that indicate whether processing should occur. Thus, predicate directives  1210  ensure that the environment is correct for execution. For example, a script may include the following predicate directive: 
   [PredicateScript(“is Installed”,“ApplicationZ”)]. 
   The predicate directive ensures that the correct application is installed on the computing device before running the script. Typically, system environment variables may be specified as predicate directives. Exemplary directives from directive types  1212 - 1220  are illustrated in Tables 1-5. Processing of the script is then complete. Thus, the present process for applying types and constraints within an interpretive environment, allows system administrators to easily specify a type, specify validation requirements, and the like without having to write the underlying logic for performing this processing. The following is an example of the constraint processing performed on a command string specified as follows: 
   [Integer][ValidationRange(3,5)]$a=4. 
   There are two constraints specified via attribution tokens denoted by “[ ]”. The first attribution token indicates that the variable is a type integer and a second attribution token indicates that the value of the variable $a must be between 3 and 5 inclusive. The example command string ensures that if the variable $a is assigned in a subsequent command string or line, the variable $a will be checked against the two constraints. Thus, the following command strings would each result in an error: 
   $a=231 
   $a=“apple” 
   $a=$(get/location). 
   The constraints are applied at various stages within the administrative tool framework. For example, applicability directives, documentation directives, and parsing guideline directives are processed at a very early stage within the parser. Data generation directives and validation directives are processed in the engine once the parser has finished parsing all the input parameters. 
   The following tables illustrate representative directives for the various categories, along with an explanation of the processing performed by the administrative tool environment in response to the directive. 
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 1 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Applicability Directives 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Name 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               PrerequisiteMachineRoleAttribute 
               Informs shell whether element 
             
             
                 
               is to be used only in certain machine 
             
             
                 
               roles (e.g., File Server, Mail Server). 
             
             
               PrerequisiteUserRoleAttribute 
               Informs shell whether element 
             
             
                 
               is to be used only in certain user roles 
             
             
                 
               (e.g., Domain Administrator, Backup 
             
             
                 
               Operator). 
             
             
               PrerequisiteScriptAttribute 
               Informs the shell this script will 
             
             
                 
               be run before excuting the actual 
             
             
                 
               command or parameter. Can be used 
             
             
                 
               for parameter validation 
             
             
               PrerequisiteUITypeAttribute 
               This is used to check the User 
             
             
                 
               interface available before excuting 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 2 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Parsing Guideline Directives 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Name 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               ParsingParameterPositionAttribute 
               Maps unqualified 
             
             
                 
               parameters based on 
             
             
                 
               position. 
             
             
               ParsingVariableLengthParameterListAttribute 
               Maps parameters 
             
             
                 
               not having a Parsing 
             
             
                 
               ParameterPosition 
             
             
                 
               attribute. 
             
             
               ParsingDisallowInteractionAttribute 
               Specifies action 
             
             
                 
               when number of 
             
             
                 
               parameters is less than 
             
             
                 
               required number. 
             
             
               ParsingRequireInteractionAttribute 
               Specifies that 
             
             
                 
               parameters are obtained 
             
             
                 
               through interaction. 
             
             
               ParsingHiddenElementAttribute 
               Makes parameter 
             
             
                 
               invisible to end user. 
             
             
               ParsingMandatoryParameterAttribute 
               Specifies that the 
             
             
                 
               parameter is required. 
             
             
               ParsingPasswordParameterAttribute 
               Requires special 
             
             
                 
               handling of parameter. 
             
             
               ParsingPromptStringAttribute 
               Specifies a prompt 
             
             
                 
               for the parameter. 
             
             
               ParsingDefaultAnswerAttribute 
               Specifies default 
             
             
                 
               answer for parameter. 
             
             
               ParsingDefaultAnswerScriptAttribute 
               Specifies action to 
             
             
                 
               get default answer for 
             
             
                 
               parameter. 
             
             
               ParsingDefaultValueAttribute 
               Specifies default 
             
             
                 
               value for parameter. 
             
             
               ParsingDefaultValueScriptAttribute 
               Specifies action to 
             
             
                 
               get default value for 
             
             
                 
               parameter. 
             
             
               ParsingParameterMappingAttribute 
               Specifies a way to 
             
             
                 
               group parameters 
             
             
               ParsingParameterDeclarationAttribute 
               This defines that the 
             
             
                 
               filed is a parameter 
             
             
               ParsingAllowPipelineInputAttribute 
               Defines the 
             
             
                 
               parameter can be 
             
             
                 
               populated 
             
             
                 
               from the pipeline 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 3 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Documentation Directives 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Name 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               DocumentNameAttribute 
               Provides a Name to refer to 
             
             
                 
               elements for interaction or help. 
             
             
               DocumentShortDescriptionAttribute 
               Provides brief description of 
             
             
                 
               element. 
             
             
               DocumentLongDescriptionAttribute 
               Provides detailed description 
             
             
                 
               of element. 
             
             
               DocumentExampleAttribute 
               Provides example of element. 
             
             
               DocumentSeeAlsoAttribute 
               Provides a list of related 
             
             
                 
               elements. 
             
             
               DocumentSynopsisAttribute 
               Provides documentation 
             
             
                 
               information for element. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 4 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Data Validation Directives 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Name 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               ValidationRangeAttribute 
               Specifies that parameter must be 
             
             
                 
               within certain range. 
             
             
               ValidationSetAttribute 
               Specifies that parameter must be 
             
             
                 
               within certain collection. 
             
             
               ValidationPatternAttribute 
               Specifies that parameter must fit 
             
             
                 
               a certain pattern. 
             
             
               ValidationLengthAttribute 
               Specifies the strings must be 
             
             
                 
               within size range. 
             
             
               ValidationTypeAttribute 
               Specifies that parameter must be 
             
             
                 
               of certain type. 
             
             
               ValidationCountAttributue 
               Specifies that input items must 
             
             
                 
               be of a certain number. 
             
             
               ValidationFileAttribute 
               Specifies certain properties for a 
             
             
                 
               file. 
             
             
               ValidationFileAttributesAttribute 
               Specifies certain properties for a 
             
             
                 
               file. 
             
             
               ValidationFileSizeAttribute 
               Specifies that files must be 
             
             
                 
               within specified range. 
             
             
               ValidationNetworkAttribute 
               Specifies that given Network 
             
             
                 
               Entity supports certain properties. 
             
             
               ValidationScriptAttribute 
               Specifies conditions to evaluate 
             
             
                 
               before using element. 
             
             
               ValidationMethodAttribute 
               Specifies conditions to evaluate 
             
             
                 
               before using element. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 5 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Processing and Encoding Directives 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Name 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               ProcessingTrimStringAttribute 
               Specifies size limit for strings. 
             
             
               ProcessingTrimCollectionAttribute 
               Specifies size limit for 
             
             
                 
               collection. 
             
             
               EncodingTypeCoercionAttribute 
               Specifies Type that objects are 
             
             
                 
               to be encoded. 
             
             
               ExpansionWildcardsAttribute 
               Provides a mechanism to allow 
             
             
                 
               globbing 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   When the exemplary administrative tool framework is operating within the .NET™ Framework, each category has a base class that is derived from a basic category class (e.g., CmdAttribute). The basic category class derives from a System.Attribute class. Each category has a pre-defined function (e.g., attrib.func( )) that is called by the parser during category processing. The script author may create a custom category that is derived from a custom category class (e.g., CmdCustomAttribute). The script author may also extend an existing category class by deriving a directive class from the base category class for that category and override the pre-defined function with their implementation. The script author may also override directives and add new directives to the pre-defined set of directives. 
   The order of processing of these directives may be stored in an external data store accessible by the parser. The administrative tool framework looks for registered categories and calls a function (e.g., ProcessCustomDirective) for each of the directives in that category. Thus, the order of category processing may be dynamic by storing the category execution information in a persistent store. At different processing stages, the parser checks in the persistent store to determine if any metadata category needs to be executed at that time. This allows categories to be easily deprecated by removing the category entry from the persistent store. 
   Exemplary Processing of Command Strings 
   One exemplary process for processing command strings is now described.  FIG. 13  is a functional flow diagram graphically illustrating the processing of a command string  1350  through a parser  220  and a core engine  224  within the administrative tool framework shown in  FIG. 2 . The exemplary command string  1350  pipelines several commands (i.e., process command  1360 , where command  1362 , sort command  1364 , and table command  1366 ). The command line  1350  may pass input parameters to any of the commands (e.g., “handlecount&gt;400” is passed to the where command  1362 ). One will note that the process command  1360  does not have any associated input parameters. 
   In the past, each command was responsible for parsing the input parameters associated with the command, determining whether the input parameters were valid, and issuing error messages if the input parameters were not valid. Because the commands were typically written by various programmers, the syntax for the input parameters on the command line was not very consistent. In addition, if an error occurred, the error message, even for the same error, was not very consistent between the commands. 
   For example, in a UNIX environment, an “ls” command and a “ps” command have many inconsistencies between them. While both accept an option “-w”, the “-w” option is used by the “ls” command to denote the width of the page, while the “-w” option is used by the “ps” command to denote print wide output (in essence, ignoring page width). The help pages associated with the “ls” and the “ps” command have several inconsistencies too, such as having options bolded in one and not the other, sorting options alphabetically in one and not the other, requiring some options to have dashes and some not. 
   The present administrative tool framework provides a more consistent approach and minimizes the amount of duplicative code that each developer must write. The administrative tool framework  200  provides a syntax (e.g., grammar), a corresponding semantics (e.g., a dictionary), and a reference model to enable developers to easily take advantage of common functionality provided by the administrative tool framework  200 . 
   Before describing the present invention any further, definitions for additional terms appearing through-out this specification are provided. Input parameter refers to input-fields for a cmdlet. Argument refers to an input parameter passed to a cmdlet that is the equivalent of a single string in the argv array or passed as a single element in a cmdlet object. As will be described below, a cmdlet provides a mechanism for specifying a grammar. The mechanism may be provided directly or indirectly. An argument is one of an option, an option-argument, or an operand following the command-name. Examples of arguments are given based on the following command line: 
   findstr/i/d:\winnt;\winnt\system32 aa*b*.ini. 
   In the above command line, “findstr” is argument 0, “/i” is argument 1, “/d:winnt;\winnt\system32” is argument 2, “aa*b” is argument 3, and “*.ini” is argument 4. An “option” is an argument to a cmdlet that is generally used to specify changes to the program&#39;s default behavior. Continuing with the example command line above, “/i” and “/d” are options. An “option-argument” is an input parameter that follows certain options. In some cases, an option-argument is included within the same argument string as the option. In other cases, the option-argument is included as the next argument. Referring again to the above command line, “winnt;\winnt\system32” is an option-argument. An “operand” is an argument to a cmdlet that is generally used as an object supplying information to a program necessary to complete program processing. Operands generally follow the options in a command line. Referring to the example command line above again, “aa*b” and “*.ini” are operands. A “parsable stream” includes the arguments. 
   Referring to  FIG. 13 , parser  220  parses a parsable stream (e.g., command string  1350 ) into constituent parts  1320 - 1326  (e.g., where portion  1322 ). Each portion  1320 - 1326  is associated with one of the cmdlets  1330 - 1336 . Parser  220  and engine  224  perform various processing, such as parsing, parameter validation, data generation, parameter processing, parameter encoding, and parameter documentation. Because parser  220  and engine  224  perform common functionality on the input parameters on the command line, the administrative tool framework  200  is able to issue consistent error messages to users. 
   As one will recognize, the executable cmdlets  1330 - 1336 , written in accordance with the present administrative tool framework require less code than commands in prior administrative environments. Each executable cmdlet  1330 - 1336  is identified using its respective constituent part  1320 - 1326 . In addition, each executable cmdlet  1330 - 1336  outputs objects (represented by arrows  1340 ,  1342 ,  1344 , and  1346 ) which are input as input objects (represented by arrows  1341 ,  1343 , and  1345 ) to the next pipelined cmdlet. These objects may be input by passing a reference (e.g., handle) to the object. The executable cmdlets  1330 - 1336  may then perform additional processing on the objects that were passed in. 
     FIG. 14  is a logical flow diagram illustrating in more detail the processing of command strings suitable for use within the process for handling input shown in  FIG. 9 . The command string processing begins at block  1401 , where either the parser or the script engine identified a command string within the input. In general the core engine performs set-up and sequencing of the data flow of the cmdlets. The set-up and sequencing for one cmdlet is described below, but is applicable to each cmdlet in a pipeline. Processing continues at block  1404 . 
   At block  1404 , a cmdlet is identified. The identification of the cmdlet may be thru registration. The core engine determines whether the cmdlet is local or remote. The cmdlet may execute in the following locations: 1) within the application domain of the administrative tool framework; 2) within another application domain of the same process as the administrative tool framework; 3) within another process on the same computing device; or 4) within a remote computing device. The communication between cmdlets operating within the same process is through objects. The communication between cmdlets operating within different processes is through a serialized structured data format. One exemplary serialized structured data format is based on the extensible markup language (XML). Processing continues at block  1406 . 
   At block  1406 , an instance of the cmdlet object is created. An exemplary process for creating an instance of the cmdlet is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 15 . Once the cmdlet object is created, processing continues at block  1408 . 
   At block  1408 , the properties associated with the cmdlet object are populated. As described above, the developer declares properties within a cmdlet class or within an external source. Briefly, the administrative tool framework will decipher the incoming object(s) to the cmdlet instantiated from the cmdlet class based on the name and type that is declared for the property. If the types are different, the type may be coerced via the extended data type manager. As mentioned earlier, in pipelined command strings, the output of each cmdlet may be a list of handles to objects. The next cmdlet may inputs this list of object handles, performs processing, and passes another list of object handles to the next cmdlet. In addition, as illustrated in  FIG. 7 , input parameters may be specified as coming from the command line. One exemplary method for populating properties associated with a cmdlet is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 16 . Once the cmdlet is populated, processing continues at block  1410 . 
   At block  1410 , the cmdlet is executed. In overview, the processing provided by the cmdlet is performed at least once, which includes processing for each input object to the cmdlet. Thus, if the cmdlet is the first cmdlet within a pipelined command string, the processing is executed once. For subsequent cmdlets, the processing is executed for each object that is passed to the cmdlet. One exemplary method for executing cmdlets is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 5 . When the input parameters are only coming from the command line, execution of the cmdlet uses the default methods provided by the base cmdlet case. Once the cmdlet is finished executing, processing proceeds to block  1412 . 
   At block  1412 , the cmdlet is cleaned-up. This includes calling the destructor for the associated cmdlet object which is responsible for de-allocating memory and the like. The processing of the command string is then complete. 
   Exemplary Process for Creating a Cmdlet Object 
     FIG. 15  is a logical flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for creating a cmdlet object suitable for use within the processing of command strings shown in  FIG. 14 . At this point, the cmdlet data structure has been developed and attributes and expected input parameters have been specified. The cmdlet has been compiled and has been registered. During registration, the class name (i.e., cmdlet name) is written in the registration store and the metadata associated with the cmdlet has been stored. The process  1500  begins at block  1501 , where the parser has received input (e.g., keystrokes) indicating a cmdlet. The parser may recognize the input as a cmdlet by looking up the input from within the registry and associating the input with one of the registered cmdlets. Processing proceeds to block  1504 . 
   At block  1504 , metadata associated with the cmdlet object class is read. The metadata includes any of the directives associated with the cmdlet. The directives may apply to the cmdlet itself or to one or more of the parameters. During cmdlet registration, the registration code registers the metadata into a persistent store. The metadata may be stored in an XML file in a serialized format, an external database, and the like. Similar to the processing of directives during script processing, each category of directives is processed at a different stage. Each metadata directive handles its own error handling. Processing continues at block  1506 . 
   At block  1506 , a cmdlet object is instantiated based on the identified cmdlet class. Processing continues at block  1508 . 
   At block  1508 , information is obtained about the cmdlet. This may occur through reflection or other means. The information is about the expected input parameters. As mentioned above, the parameters that are declared public (e.g., public string Name  730 ) correspond to expected input parameters that can be specified in a command string on a command line or provided in an input stream. The administrative tool framework through the extended type manager, described in  FIG. 18 , provides a common interface for returning the information (on a need basis) to the caller. Processing continues at block  1510 . 
   At block  1510 , applicability directives (e.g., Table 1) are applied. The applicability directives insure that the class is used in certain machine roles and/or user roles. For example, certain cmdlets may only be used by Domain Administrators. If the constraint specified in one of the applicability directives is not met, an error occurs. Processing continues at block  1512 . 
   At block  1512 , metadata is used to provide intellisense. At this point in processing, the entire command string has not yet been entered. The administrative tool framework, however, knows the available cmdlets. Once a cmdlet has been determined, the administrative tool framework knows the input parameters that are allowed by reflecting on the cmdlet object. Thus, the administrative tool framework may auto-complete the cmdlet once a disambiguating portion of the cmdlet name is provided, and then auto-complete the input parameter once a disambiguating portion of the input parameter has been typed on the command line. Auto-completion may occur as soon as the portion of the input parameter can identify one of the input parameters unambiguously. In addition, auto-completion may occur on cmdlet names and operands too. Processing continues at block  1514 . 
   At block  1514 , the process waits until the input parameters for the cmdlet have been entered. This may occur once the user has indicated the end of the command string, such as by hitting a return key. In a script, a new line indicates the end of the command string. This wait may include obtaining additional information from the user regarding the parameters and applying other directives. When the cmdlet is one of the pipelined parameters, processing may begin immediately. Once, the necessary command string and input parameters have been provided, processing is complete. 
   Exemplary Process for Populating the Cmdlet 
   An exemplary process for populating a cmdlet is illustrated in  FIG. 16  and is now described, in conjunction with  FIG. 5 . In one exemplary administrative tool framework, the core engine performs the processing to populate the parameters for the cmdlet. Processing begins at block  1601  after an instance of a cmdlet has been created. Processing continues to block  1602 . 
   At block  1602 , a parameter (e.g., ProcessName) declared within the cmdlet is retrieved. Based on the declaration with the cmdlet, the core engine recognizes that the incoming input objects will provide a property named “ProcessName”. If the type of the incoming property is different than the type specified in the parameter declaration, the type will be coerced via the extended type manager. The process of coercing data types is explained below in the subsection entitled “Exemplary Extended Type Manager Processing.” Processing continues to block  1603 . 
   At block  1603 , an attribute associated with the parameter is obtained. The attribute identifies whether the input source for the parameter is the command line or whether it is from the pipeline. Processing continues to decision block  1604 . 
   At decision block  1604 , a determination is made whether the attribute specifies the input source as the command line. If the input source is the command line, processing continues at block  1609 . Otherwise, processing continues at decision block  1605 . 
   At decision block  1605 , a determination is made whether the property name specified in the declaration should be used or whether a mapping for the property name should be used. This determination is based on whether the command input specified a mapping for the parameter. The following line illustrates an exemplary mapping of the parameter “ProcessName” to the “foo” member of the incoming object: 
   $ get/process|where han*-gt 500|stop/process-ProcessName&lt;-foo. 
   Processing continues at block  1606 . 
   At block  1606 , the mapping is applied. The mapping replaces the name of the expected parameter from “ProcessName” to “foo”, which is then used by the core engine to parse the incoming objects and to identify the correct expected parameter. Processing continues at block  1608 . 
   At block  1608 , the extended type manager is queried to locate a value for the parameter within the incoming object. As explain in conjunction with the extended type manager, the extended type manager takes the parameter name and uses reflection to identify a parameter within the incoming object with parameter name. The extended type manager may also perform other processing for the parameter, if necessary. For example, the extended type manager may coerce the type of data to the expected type of data through a conversion mechanism described above. Processing continues to decision block  1610 . 
   Referring back to block  1609 , if the attribute specifies that the input source is the command line, data from the command line is obtained. Obtaining the data from the command line may be performed via the extended type manager. Processing then continues to decision block  1610 . 
   At decision block  1610 , a determination is made whether there is another expected parameter. If there is another expected parameter, processing loops back to block  1602  and proceeds as described above. Otherwise, processing is complete and returns. 
   Thus, as shown, cmdlets act as a template for shredding incoming data to obtain the expected parameters. In addition, the expected parameters are obtained without knowing the type of incoming object providing the value for the expected parameter. This is quite different than traditional administrative environments. Traditional administrative environments are tightly bound and require that the type of object be known at compile time. In addition, in traditional environments, the expected parameter would have been passed into the function by value or by reference. Thus, the present parsing (e.g., “shredding”) mechanism allows programmers to specify the type of parameter without requiring them to specifically know how the values for these parameters are obtained. 
   For example, given the following declaration for the cmdlet Foo: 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               class Foo : Cmdlet 
             
             
                 
               { 
             
             
                 
                 string Name; 
             
             
                 
                 Bool Recurse; 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   The command line syntax may be any of the following: 
   $ Foo-Name: (string)-Recurse: True 
   $ Foo-Name &lt;string&gt;-Recurse True 
   $Foo-Name (string). 
   The set of rules may be modified by system administrators in order to yield a desired syntax. In addition, the parser may support multiple sets of rules, so that more than one syntax can be used by users. In essence, the grammar associated with the cmdlet structure (e.g., string Name and Bool Recurse) drives the parser. 
   In general, the parsing directives describe how the parameters entered as the command string should map to the expected parameters identified in the cmdlet object. The input parameter types are checked to determine whether correct. If the input parameter types are not correct, the input parameters may be coerced to become correct. If the input parameter types are not correct and can not be coerced, a usage error is printed. The usage error allows the user to become aware of the correct syntax that is expected. The usage error may obtain information describing the syntax from the Documentation Directives. Once the input parameter types have either been mapped or have been verified, the corresponding members in the cmdlet object instance are populated. As the members are populated, the extended type manager provides processing of the input parameter types. Briefly, the processing may include a property path mechanism, a key mechanism, a compare mechanism, a conversion mechanism, a globber mechanism, a relationship mechanism, and a property set mechanism. Each of these mechanisms is described in detail below in the section entitled “Extended Type Manager Processing”, which also includes illustrative examples. 
   Exemplary Process for Executing the Cmdlet 
   An exemplary process for executing a cmdlet is illustrated in  FIG. 17  and is now described. In one exemplary administrative tool environment, the core engine executes the cmdlet. As mentioned above, the code  1442  within the second method  1440  is executed for each input object. Processing begins at block  1701  where the cmdlet has already been populated. Processing continues at block  1702 . 
   At block  1702 , a statement from the code  542  is retrieved for execution. Processing continues at decision block  1704 . 
   At decision block  1704 , a determination is made whether a hook is included within the statement. Turning briefly to  FIG. 5 , the hook may include calling an API provided by the core engine. For example, statement  550  within the code  542  of cmdlet  500  in  FIG. 5  calls the confirmprocessing API specifying the necessary parameters, a first string (e.g., “PID=”), and a parameter (e.g., PID). Turning back to  FIG. 17 , if the statement includes the hook, processing continues to block  1712 . Thus, if the instruction calling the confirmprocessing API is specified, the cmdlet operates in an alternate executing mode that is provided by the operating environment. Otherwise, processing continues at block  1706  and execution continues in the “normal” mode. 
   At block  1706 , the statement is processed. Processing then proceeds to decision block  1708 . At block  1708 , a determination is made whether the code includes another statement. If there is another statement, processing loops back to block  1702  to get the next statement and proceeds as described above. Otherwise, processing continues to decision block  1714 . 
   At decision block  1714 , a determination is made whether there is another input object to process. If there is another input object, processing continues to block  1716  where the cmdlet is populated with data from the next object. The population process described in  FIG. 16  is performed with the next object. Processing then loops back to block  1702  and proceeds as described above. Once all the objects have been processed, the process for executing the cmdlet is complete and returns. 
   Returning back to decision block  1704 , if the statement includes the hook, processing continues to block  1712 . At block  1712 , the additional features provided by the administrative tool environment are processed. Processing continues at decision block  1708  and continues as described above. 
   The additional processing performed within block  1712  is now described in conjunction with the exemplary data structure  600  illustrated in  FIG. 6 . As explained above, within the command base class  600  there may be parameters declared that correspond to additional expected input parameters (e.g., a switch). 
   The switch includes a predetermined string, and when recognized, directs the core engine to provide additional functionality to the cmdlet. If the parameter verbose  610  is specified in the command input, verbose statements  614  are executed. The following is an example of a command line that includes the verbose switch: 
   $ get/process|where “han*-gt 500”|stop/process-verbose. 
   In general, when “-verbose” is specified within the command input, the core engine executes the command for each input object and forwards the actual command that was executed for each input object to the host program for display. The following is an example of output generated when the above command line is executed in the exemplary administrative tool environment: 
   $ stop/process PID=15 
   $ stop/process PID=33. 
   If the parameter whatif  620  is specified in the command input, whatif statements  624  are executed. The following is an example of a command line that includes the whatif switch: 
   $ get/process|where “han*-gt 500”|stop/process-whatif. 
   In general, when “-whatif” is specified, the core engine does not actually execute the code  542 , but rather sends the commands that would have been executed to the host program for display. The following is an example of output generated when the above command line is executed in the administrative tool environment of the present invention: 
   #$ stop/process PID=15 
   #$ stop/process PID=33. 
   If the parameter confirm  630  is specified in the command input, confirm statements  634  are executed. The following is an example of a command line that includes the confirm switch: 
   $ get/process|where “han*-gt 500”|stop/process-confirm. 
   In general, when “-confirm” is specified, the core engine requests additional user input on whether to proceed with the command or not. The following is an example of output generated when the above command line is executed in the administrative tool environment of the present invention. 
   $ stop/process PID 15 
   Y/N Y 
   $ stop/process PID 33 
   Y/N N. 
   As described above, the exemplary data structure  600  may also include a security method  640  that determines whether the task being requested for execution should be allowed. In traditional administrative environments, each command is responsible for checking whether the person executing the command has sufficient privileges to perform the command. In order to perform this check, extensive code is needed to access information from several sources. Because of these complexities, many commands did not perform a security check. The inventors of the present administrative tool environment recognized that when the task is specified in the command input, the necessary information for performing the security check is available within the administrative tool environment. Therefore, the administrative tool framework performs the security check without requiring complex code from the tool developers. The security check may be performed for any cmdlet that defines the hook within its cmdlet. Alternatively, the hook may be an optional input parameter that can be specified in the command input, similar to the verbose parameter described above. 
   The security check is implemented to support roles based authentication, which is generally defined as a system of controlling which users have access to resources based on the role of the user. Thus, each role is assigned certain access rights to different resources. A user is then assigned to one or more roles. In general, roles based authentication focus on three items: principle, resource, and action. The principle identifies who requested the action to be performed on the resource. 
   The inventors of the present invention recognized that the cmdlet being requested corresponded to the action that was to be performed. In addition, the inventors appreciated that the owner of the process in which the administrative tool framework was executing corresponded to the principle. Further, the inventors appreciated that the resource is specified within the cmdlet. Therefore, because the administrative tool framework has access to these items, the inventors recognized that the security check could be performed from within the administrative tool framework without requiring tool developers to implement the security check. 
   The operation of the security check may be performed any time additional functionality is requested within the cmdlet by using the hook, such as the confirmprocessing API. Alternatively, security check may be performed by checking whether a security switch was entered on the command line, similar to verbose, whatif, and confirm. For either implementation, the checkSecurity method calls an API provided by a security process (not shown) that provides a set of APIs for determining who is allowed. The security process takes the information provided by the administrative tool framework and provides a result indicating whether the task may be completed. The administrative tool framework may then provide an error or just stop the execution of the task. 
   Thus, by providing the hook within the cmdlet, the developers may use additional processing provided by the administrative tool framework. 
   Exemplary Extended Type Manager Processing 
   As briefly mentioned above in conjunction with  FIG. 18 , the extended type manager may perform additional processing on objects that are supplied. The additional processing may be performed at the request of the parser  220 , the script engine  222 , or the pipeline processor  402 . The additional processing includes a property path mechanism, a key mechanism, a compare mechanism, a conversion mechanism, a globber mechanism, a relationship mechanism, and a property set mechanism. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the extended type manager may also be extended with other processing without departing from the scope of the claimed invention. Each of the additional processing mechanisms is now described. 
   First, the property path mechanism allows a string to navigate properties of objects. In current reflection systems, queries may query properties of an object. However, in the present extended type manager, a string may be specified that will provide a navigation path to successive properties of objects. The following is an illustrative syntax for the property path: P 1 .P 2 .P 3 .P 4 . 
   Each component (e.g., P 1 , P 2 , P 3 , and P 4 ) comprises a string that may represent a property, a method with parameters, a method without parameters, a field, an XPATH, or the like. An XPATH specifies a query string to search for an element (e.g., “/FOO@=13”). Within the string, a special character may be included to specifically indicate the type of component. If the string does not contain the special character, the extended type manager may perform a lookup to determine the type of component. For example, if component P 1  is an object, the extended type manager may query whether P 2  is a property of the object, a method on the object, a field of the object, or a property set. Once the extended type manager identifies the type for P 2 , processing according to that type is performed. If the component is not one of the above types, the extended type manager may further query the extended sources to determine whether there is a conversion function to convert the type of P 1  into the type of P 2 . These and other lookups will now be described using illustrative command strings and showing the respective output. 
   The following is an illustrative string that includes a property path: 
   $ get/process|/where hand*-gt&gt;500|format/table name.toupper, ws.kb, exe*.ver*.description.tolower.trunc(30). 
   In the above illustrative string, there are three property paths: (1) “name.toupper”; (2) “ws.kb”; and (3) “exe*.ver*.description.tolower.trunc(30). Before describing these property paths, one should note that “name”, “ws”, and “exe” specify the properties for the table. In addition, one should note that each of these properties is a direct property of the incoming object, originally generated by “get/process” and then pipelined through the various cmdlets. Processing involved for each of the three property paths will now be described. 
   In the first property path (i.e., “name.toupper”), name is a direct property of the incoming object and is also an object itself. The extended type manager queries the system using the priority lookup described above to determine the type for toupper. The extended type manager discovers that toupper is not a property. However, toupper may be a method inherited by a string type to convert lower case letters to upper case letters within the string. Alternatively, the extended type manager may have queried the extended metadata to determine whether there is any third party code that can convert a name object to upper case. Upon finding the component type, processing is performed in accordance with that component type. 
   In the second property path (i.e., “ws.kb”), “ws” is a direct property of the incoming object and is also an object itself. The extended type manager determines that “ws” is an integer. Then, the extended type manager queries whether kb is a property of an integer, whether kb is a method of an integer, and finally queries whether any code knows how to take an integer and convert the integer to a kb type. Third party code is registered to perform this conversion and the conversion is performed. 
   In the third property path (i.e., “exe*.ver*.description.tolower.trunc(30)”), there are several components. The first component (“exe*”) is a direct property of the incoming object and is also an object. Again, the extended type manager proceeds down the lookup query in order to process the second component (“ver*). The “exe* object does not have a “ver*” property or method, so the extend type manager queries the extended metadata to determine whether there is any code that is registered to convert an executable name into a version. For this example, such code exists. The code may take the executable name string and use it to open a file, then accesses the version block object, and return the description property (the third component (“description”) of the version block object. The extended type manager then performs this same lookup mechanism for the fourth component (“tolower”) and the fifth component (“trunc(40)”). Thus, as illustrated, the extended type manager may perform quite elaborate processing on a command string without the administrator needing to write any specific code. Table 1 illustrates output generated for the illustrative string. 
   
     
       
         
             
             
             
           
             
               TABLE 1 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Name.toupper 
               ws.kb 
               exe*.ver*.description.tolower.trunc(30) 
             
             
                 
             
           
          
             
               ETCLIENT 
               29,964 
               etclient 
             
             
               CSRSS 
                6,944 
             
             
               SVCHOST 
               28,944 
               generic host process for win32 
             
             
               OUTLOOK 
               18,556 
               office outlook 
             
             
               MSMSGS 
               13,248 
               messenger 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   Another query mechanism  1824  includes a key. The key identifies one or more properties that make an instance of the data type unique. For example, in a database, one column may be identified as the key which can uniquely identify each row (e.g., social security number). The key is stored within the type metadata  1840  associated with the data type. This key may then be used by the extended type manager when processing objects of that data type. The data type may be an extended data type or an existing data type. 
   Another query mechanism  1824  includes a compare mechanism. The compare mechanism compares two objects. If the two objects directly support the compare function, the directly supported compare function is executed. However, if neither object supports a compare function, the extended type manager may look in the type metadata for code that has been registered to support the compare between the two objects. An illustrative series of command line strings invoking the compare mechanism is shown below, along with corresponding output in Table 2. 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
               TABLE 2 
             
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               $ $a = $(get/date) 
             
             
                 
               $ start/sleep 5 
             
             
                 
               $ $b = $(get/date 
             
             
                 
               compare/time $a $b 
             
          
         
         
             
             
             
          
             
                 
               Ticks: 
               51196579 
             
             
                 
               Days: 
               0 
             
             
                 
               Hours: 
               0 
             
             
                 
               Milliseconds: 
               119 
             
             
                 
               Minutes: 
               0 
             
             
                 
               Seconds: 
               5 
             
             
                 
               TotalDays: 
               5.92552997685185E−05 
             
             
                 
               TotalHours: 
               0.00142212719444444 
             
             
                 
               TotalMilliseconds: 
               5119.6579 
             
             
                 
               TotalMinutes: 
               0.0853276316666667 
             
             
                 
               TotalSeconds: 
               5.1196579 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   Compare/time cmdlet is written to compare two datetime objects. In this case, the DateTime object supports the IComparable interface. 
   Another query mechanism  1824  includes a conversion mechanism. The extended type manager allows code to be registered stating its ability to perform a specific conversion. Then, when an object of type A is input and a cmdlet specifies an object of type B, the extended type manager may perform the conversion using one of the registered conversions. The extended type manager may perform a series of conversions in order to coerce type A into type B. The property path described above (“ws.kb”) illustrates a conversion mechanism. 
   Another query mechanism  1824  includes a globber mechanism. A globber refers to a wild card character within a string. The globber mechanism inputs the string with the wild card character and produces a set of objects. The extended type manager allows code to be registered that specifies wildcard processing. The property path described above (“exe*.ver*.description.tolower.trunc(30)) illustrates the globber mechanism. A registered process may provide globbing for file names, file objects, incoming properties, and the like. 
   Another query mechanism  1824  includes a property set mechanism. The property set mechanism allows a name to be defined for a set of properties. An administrator may then specify the name within the command string to obtain the set of properties. The property set may be defined in various ways. In one way, a predefined parameter, such as “?”, may be entered as an input parameter for a cmdlet. The operating environment upon recognizing the predefined parameter lists all the properties of the incoming object. The list may be a GUI that allows an administrator to easily check (e.g., “click on”) the properties desired and name the property set. The property set information is then stored in the extended metadata. An illustrative string invoking the property set mechanism is shown below, along with corresponding output in Table 3: 
   $ get/process|where han*-gt&gt;500|format/table config. 
   In this illustrative string, a property set named “config” has been defined to include a name property, a process id property (Pid), and a priority property. The output for the table is shown below. 
   
     
       
         
             
             
             
             
           
             
                 
               TABLE 3 
             
             
                 
                 
             
             
                 
               Name 
               Pid 
               Priority 
             
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
          
         
         
             
             
             
             
          
             
                 
               ETClient 
               3528 
               Normal 
             
             
                 
               csrss 
               528 
               Normal 
             
             
                 
               svchost 
               848 
               Normal 
             
             
                 
               OUTLOOK 
               2,772 
               Normal 
             
             
                 
               msmsgs 
               2,584 
               Normal 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   Another query mechanism  1824  includes a relationship mechanism. In contrast to traditional type systems that support one relationship (i.e., inheritance), the relationship mechanism supports expressing more than one relationship between types. Again, these relationships are registered. The relationship may include finding items that the object consumes or finding the items that consume the object. The extended type manager may access ontologies that describe various relationships. Using the extended metadata and the code, a specification for accessing any ontology service, such as OWL, DAWL, and the like, may be described. The following is a portion of an illustrative string which utilizes the relationship mechanism: .OWLV:“string”. 
   The “OWL” identifier identifies the ontology service and the “string” specifies the specific string within the ontology service. Thus, the extended type manager may access types supplied by ontology services. 
   Exemplary Process for Displaying Command Line Data 
   The present mechanism provides a data driven command line output. The formatting and outputting of the data is provided by one or more cmdlets in the pipeline of cmdlets. Typically, these cmdlets are included within the non-management cmdlets described in conjunction with  FIG. 2  above. The cmdlets may include a format cmdlet, a markup cmdlet, a convert cmdlet, a transform cmdlet, and an out cmdlet. 
     FIG. 19  graphically depicts exemplary sequences  1901 - 1907  of these cmdlets within a pipeline. The first sequence  1901  illustrates the out cmdlet  1910  as the last cmdlet in the pipeline. In the same manner as described above for other cmdlets, the out cmdlet  1910  accepts a stream of pipeline objects generated and processed by other cmdlets within the pipeline. However, in contrast to most cmdlets, the out cmdlet  1910  does not emit pipeline objects for other cmdlets. Instead, the out cmdlet  1910  is responsible for rendering/displaying the results generated by the pipeline. Each out cmdlet  1910  is associated with an output destination, such as a device, a program, and the like. For example, for a console device, the out cmdlet  1910  may be specified as out/console; for an internet browser, the out cmdlet  1910  may be specified as out/browser; and for a window, the out cmdlet  1910  may be specified as out/window. Each specific out cmdlet is familiar with the capabilities of its associated destination. Locale information (e.g., date &amp;currency formats) are processed by the out cmdlet  1910 , unless a convert cmdlet preceded the out cmdlet in the pipeline. In this situation, the convert cmdlet processed the local information. 
   Each host is responsible for supporting certain out cmdlets, such as out/console. The host also supports any destination specific host cmdlet (e.g., out/chart that directs output to a chart provided by a spreadsheet application). In addition, the host is responsible for providing default handling of results. The out cmdlet in this sequence may decide to implement its behavior by calling other output processing cmdlets (such as format/markup/convert/transform). Thus, the out cmdlet may implicitly modify sequence  1901  to any of the other sequences or may add its own additional format/output cmdlets. 
   The second sequence  1902  illustrates a format cmdlet  1920  before the out cmdlet  1910 . For this sequence, the format cmdlet  1920  accepts a stream of pipeline objects generated and processed by other cmdlets within the pipeline. In overview, the format cmdlet  1920  provides a way to select display properties and a way to specify a page layout, such as shape, column widths, headers, footers, and the like. The shape may include a table, a wide list, a columnar list, and the like. In addition, the format cmdlet  1920  may include computations of totals or sums. Exemplary processing performed by a format cmdlet  1920  is described below in conjunction with  FIG. 20 . Briefly, the format cmdlet emits format objects, in addition to emitting pipeline objects. The format objects can be recognized downstream by an out cmdlet (e.g., out cmdlet  1920  in sequence  1902 ) via the extended type manager or other mechanism. The out cmdlet  1920  may choose to either use the emitted format objects or may choose to ignore them. The out cmdlet determines the page layout based on the page layout data specified in the display information. In certain instances, modifications to the page layout may be specified by the out cmdlet. In one exemplary process the out cmdlet may determine an unspecified column width by finding a maximum length for each property of a predetermined number of objects (e.g., 50) and setting the column width to the maximum length. The format objects include formatting information, header/footer information, and the like. 
   The third sequence  1903  illustrates a format cmdlet  1920  before the out cmdlet  1910 . However, in the third sequence  1903 , a markup cmdlet  1930  is pipelined between the format cmdlet  1920  and the out cmdlet  1910 . The markup cmdlet  1930  provides a mechanism for adding property annotation (e.g., font, color) to selected parameters. Thus, the markup cmdlet  1930  appears before the output cmdlet  1910 . The property annotations may be implemented using a “shadow property bag”, or by adding property annotations in a custom namespace in a property bag. The markup cmdlet  1930  may appear before the format cmdlet  1920  as long as the markup annotations may be maintained during processing of the format cmdlet  1920 . 
   The fourth sequence  1904  again illustrates a format cmdlet  1920  before the out cmdlet  1910 . However, in the fourth sequence  1904 , a convert cmdlet  1940  is pipelined between the format cmdlet  1920  and the out cmdlet  1910 . The convert cmdlet  1940  is also configured to process the format objects emitted by the format cmdlet  1920 . The convert cmdlet  1940  converts the pipelined objects into a specific encoding based on the format objects. The convert cmdlet  1940  is associated with the specific encoding. For example, the convert cmdlet  1940  that converts the pipelined objects into Active Directory Objects (ADO) may be declared as “convert/ADO” on the command line. Likewise, the convert cmdlet  1940  that converts the pipelined objects into comma separated values (csv) may be declared as “convert/csv” on the command line. Some of the convert cmdlets  1940  (e.g., convert/XML and convert/html) may be blocking commands, meaning that all the pipelined objects are received before executing the conversion. Typically, the out cmdlet  1920  may determine whether to use the formatting information provided by the format objects. However, when a convert cmdlet  1920  appears before the out cmdlet  1920 , the actual data conversion has already occurred before the out cmdlet receives the objects. Therefore, in this situation, the out cmdlet can not ignore the conversion. 
   The fifth sequence  1905  illustrates a format cmdlet  1920 , a markup cmdlet  1930 , a convert cmdlet  1940 , and an out cmdlet  1910  in that order. Thus, this illustrates that the markup cmdlet  1930  may occur before the convert cmdlet  1940 . 
   The sixth sequence  1906  illustrates a format cmdlet  1920 , a specific convert cmdlet (e.g., convert/xml cmdlet  1940 ′), a specific transform cmdlet (e.g., transform/xslt cmdlet  1950 ), and an out cmdlet  1910 . The convert/xml cmdlet  1940 ′ converts the pipelined objects into an extended markup language (XML) document. The transform/xslt cmdlet  1950  transforms the XML document into another XML document using an Extensible Style Lanuage (XSL) style sheet. The transform process is commonly referred to as extensible style language transformation (XSLT), in which an XSL processor reads the XML document and follows the instructions within the XSL style sheet to create the new XML document. 
   The seventh sequence  1907  illustrates a format cmdlet  1920 , a markup cmdlet  1930 , a specific convert cmdlet (e.g., convert/xml cmdlet  1940 ′), a specific transform cmdlet (e.g., transform/xslt cmdlet  1950 ), and an out cmdlet  1910 . Thus, the seventh sequence  1907  illustrates having the markup cmdlet  1930  upstream from the convert cmdlet and transform cmdlet. 
     FIG. 20  illustrates exemplary processing  2000  performed by a format cmdlet. The formatting process begins at block  2001 , after the format cmdlet has been parsed and invoked by the parser and pipeline processor in a manner described above. Processing continues at block  2002 . 
   At block  2002 , a pipeline object is received as input to the format cmdlet. Processing continues at block  2004 . 
   At block  2004 , a query is initiated to identify a type for the pipelined object. This query is performed by the extended type manager as described above in conjunction with  FIG. 18 . Once the extended type manager has identified the type for the object, processing continues at block  2006 . 
   At block  2006 , the identified type is looked up in display information. An exemplary format for the display information is illustrated in  FIG. 21  and will be described below. Processing continues at decision block  2008 . 
   At decision block  2008 , a determination is made whether the identified type is specified within the display information. If there is no entry within the display information for the identified type, processing is complete. Otherwise, processing continues at block  2010 . 
   At block  2010 , formatting information associated with the identified type is obtained from the display information. Processing continues at block  2012 . 
   At block  2012 , information is emitted on the pipeline. Once the information is emitted, the processing is complete. 
   Exemplary information that may be emitted is now described in further detail. The information may include formatting information, header/footer information, and a group end/begin signal object. The formatting information may include a shape, a label, numbering/bullets, column widths, character encoding type, content font properties, page length, group-by-property name, and the like. Each of these may have additional specifications associated with it. For example, the shape may specify whether the shape is a table, a list, or the like. Labels may specify whether to use column headers, list labels, or the like. Character encoding may specify ASCII, UTF-8, Unicode, and the like. Content font properties may specify the font that is applied to the property values that are display. A default font property (e.g., Courier New, 10 point) may be used if content font properties are not specified. 
   The header/footer information may include a header/footer scope, font properties, title, subtitle, date, time, page numbering, separator, and the like. For example, the scope may specify a document, a page, a group, or the like. Additional properties may be specified for either the header or the footer. For example, for group and document footers, the additional properties may include properties or columns to calculate a sum/total, object counts, label strings for totals and counts, and the like. 
   The group end/begin signal objects are emitted when the format cmdlet detects that a group-by property has changed. When this occurs, the format cmdlet treats the stream of pipeline objects as previously sorted and does not re-sort them. The group end/begin signal objects may be interspersed with the pipeline objects. Multiple group-by properties may be specified for nested sorting. The format cmdlet may also emit a format end object that includes final sums and totals. 
   Turning briefly to  FIG. 21 , an exemplary display information  2100  is in a structured format and contains information (e.g., formatting information, header/footer information, group-by properties or methods) associated with each object that has been defined. For example, the display information  2100  may be XML-based. Each of the afore-mentioned properties may then be specified within the display information. The information within the display information  2100  may be populated by the owner of the object type that is being entered. The operating environment provides certain APIs and cmdlets that allow the owner to update the display information by creating, deleting, and modifying entries. 
     FIG. 22  is a table listing an exemplary syntax  2201 - 2213  for certain format cmdlets (e., format/table, format/list, and format/wide), markup cmdlets (e.g., add/markup), convert cmdlets (e.g., convert/text, convert/sv, convert/csv, convert/ADO, convert/XML, convert/html), transform cmdlets (e.g., transform/XSLT) and out cmdlets (e.g., out/console, out/file).  FIG. 23  illustrates results rendered by the out/console cmdlet using various pipeline sequences of the output processing cmdlets (e.g., format cmdlets, convert cmdlets, and markup cmdlets). 
   As described, the mechanism for providing data driven command line output may be employed in an administrative tool environment. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the mechanism may be employed in various environments that need to display results of pipelined commands. By using the output processing cmdlets in various pipeline sequences, command line users may generate robust and versatile displays with minimal code. In contrast, using traditional mechanisms, extensive code in the output command is needed. In addition, the extensive code may not be uniform with other code in other output commands. These and other limitations with the traditional mechanism for displaying results are overcome by the present mechanism for providing data driven command line output. 
   Although details of specific implementations and embodiments are described above, such details are intended to satisfy statutory disclosure obligations rather than to limit the scope of the following claims. Thus, the invention as defined by the claims is not limited to the specific features described above. Rather, the invention is claimed in any of its forms or modifications that fall within the proper scope of the appended claims, appropriately interpreted in accordance with the doctrine of equivalents.