On 18/06/2010, Henry Vermaak wrote: > obvious ways. Xml makes hierarchies very clear.
Yes, I stated that, but that doesn't seem to be how Lazarus IDE uses it. If *all* settings was stored in a single settings.xml file, then yes, XML would probably make more sense. > other hacks and tricks, which you would have to parse manually. Most > people just tend to flatten it out, which you did in your example. In my example, the filename itself told me it is "compiler options", so I didn't see the need to duplicate that fact in the section names. I wouldn't really go as far as calling it a "trick" or "hack", just normalization of data and removing duplicates. :) > CompilerOptionsParsing block. You would've had to add some prefix, > which in time will make the ini more unreadable. Umm... the current xml files already use stacks of prefixes. For example "compileroptionsXXX" or "XXXoptions". So in the case of XML, all those prefixes are accepted behaviour (which then could be too in INI files), or those prefixes could be removed from the XML files and make it more (human) readable than it currently is. > Possibly. I tend to store app settings in an ini file, So do I and probably most other developers here too. Even FPC's RTL uses INI files for ~/.config/<appname>/ settings which Lazarus IDE could have piggybacked on. That's why I am interested to here the reason from a Lazarus core developer why Lazarus IDE chose XML. Maybe they know something us poor mortals don't. ;-) -- Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
