| Re: [AD] Allegro 4.3 Settings/Conf API |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] Allegro 4.3 Settings/Conf API
- From: Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 05:59:46 -0700
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=LppvPyCe7WxsYRJjCB32x9GB84pLVBsQrbNSjMh6h50MPidxaqtD0gtwd5eikrlO7MErhxfNPFRXCyGUpaZe89L0UySDIcVa5SgBuFKOpQSiQ/dCP78ZolZ2zK0+0JQS7R4YhU82lkBRT9wCt/o/3eGwj5C7Q/aHeGhYpiEAZiQ=
On November 17, 2005 05:00 am, Peter Wang wrote:
> On 2005-11-15, Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > In the past a system not too far removed from what we have now was
> > suggested, but should we not allow the system to be "extended"? IE: allow
> > the system (windows/mac etc) define a storage method for the settings as
> > well as the user?
> >
> > So we could allow access to the Windows registry, whatever OSX uses, or
> > even allow someone to write an XML backend if they so wish?
>
> I don't think that is useful. It might allow Allegro settings to be
> stored in the Windows registry but unless everyone uses the same addon
> it won't be understood by all Allegro programs. Besides, Allegro
> shouldn't need _any_ configuring at all in the normal case.
>
> If you just want a database or XML API for your own program, you can
> get that elsewhere. No need to go through an Allegro layer.
>
> If you _really_ want, the API should be able to create empty CONFIG
> objects and populate them, then later extract all the data one by one.
> You could then write replacements for the config file reader and writer
> functions, substituting whatever file format you like, but Allegro won't
> need to know anything about it.
>
> Peter
Sorry, I suppose I was caught up in the (imo beautiful) idea of Allegro as the
platform. Somewhat similar to Qt infact.
You want to make sure applications act the way they should* on any platform
that Allegro supports, allegro is going to have to provide a layer over the
features any application that uses Allegro is going to need. And in most
cases, its a very thin layer, but add up all those cases, you get a large pit
of muck that noone will beable to plan for, and have to plan for for each
individual application.
*) That doesn't nesesarily mean act the same on all platforms, because as we
all know, different platforms do things differently, and a person using a
platform you don't have access to, is going to expect your application to
behayve according to that platform's specs.
Most platform's have similar ideologies, desktop, icons, windows, menus, but
they still manage to be different enough from one to the next, that getting
them all right all the time, just isn't going to happen.
$0.02.
--
Thomas Fjellstrom