Shawn Rutledge wrote: > 2011/11/18 João Abecasis <joao.abeca...@nokia.com>: >> The reason for trying to keep some distance from QSettings is exactly that >> it has flaws and issues. I don't want to be *forced* to use it or >> re-implement it. Ideally, the backend will be handled by a platform-specific >> plugin that is *not* QSettings or based on it. > > QSettings could be extended to support json too though.
I think QSettings's data model already supports that. Even if it can't currently parse json directly, that's not the issue. >> (Also note that there is a wish to remove QSettings from Qt Core in Qt 5, >> pending availability of something to replace it with.) > > Why? We wouldn't lose the ability to read and write the same data > stores that QSettings does? I think the registry is not considered > obsolete yet on Windows, as ugly as it is? This is not about supporting or not the windows registry. It's also not about parsing and outputting data in the JSON format. It's about the QSettings API and its implementation. Still, all of that is a completely different discussion. The bottom line is that I don't want to lock us in to what QSettings offers today and instead want to discuss the data model that a settings API can support and the interface that we use to access it. Cheers, João _______________________________________________ Qt-qml mailing list Qt-qml@qt.nokia.com http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-qml
