Yes I do not mind, I even like programs writing their settings in such a
way. Windows NT keeps the whole its registry in memory (based on my
experience with it I even suspect that it keeps it intentionally in
*physical* memory for some strange reasons). Image that you have 100
programs installed on your system. But simultaneously you run, say, 5 of
them. But settings for all other 95 programs are still eating your
physical memory... Because of this I do not like programs keeping large
settings in registry. I am sure I am not alone in this. Note that I even
did not mention cross platform portability issues, just poor registry
implementation in NT.
All the Best
Pavel
>
> Thanks.
>
> I had no know idea if "." prefix directories are reasonable of not
> reasonable on Win 95/98/NT. Note this is just UNIX convention, that makes
> sense for UNIX like operating system, because of the default
> de facto behaviour of the `/usr/bin/ls' program.
>
> In short you do not mind if a program creates
> `C:\Winnt\Profiles\johndoe\.gimprc'
> directory to stores a properties file , say `default.config' on your
> machine. Assuming %USRPROFILE% is `C:\Winnt\Profiles\johndoe'.
>
> BTW: This `SysProps.java' program is handy.
>
> Pete
