Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. app.config

app.config

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
question
13 Posts 6 Posters 2 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M Marc Clifton

    Explain to me what actually is wrong with ini files that app.config improves upon. Marc

    Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!

    T Offline
    T Offline
    tgrt
    wrote on last edited by
    #4

    I'm not really trying to argue the point, but XML allows schemas to enforce structure and validity.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M Marc Clifton

      Explain to me what actually is wrong with ini files that app.config improves upon. Marc

      Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!

      J Offline
      J Offline
      Jorgen Andersson
      wrote on last edited by
      #5

      The use of a standardized parser maybe?

      Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello (√-shit)2

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Marc Clifton

        Explain to me what actually is wrong with ini files that app.config improves upon. Marc

        Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Lost User
        wrote on last edited by
        #6

        They don't fit the Microsoft "if it's too easy we need a more complex system" model.

        T 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          They don't fit the Microsoft "if it's too easy we need a more complex system" model.

          T Offline
          T Offline
          trkchk
          wrote on last edited by
          #7

          what is wrong? nothing! but what is right? being forced to use kernel calls and the limitations of them, let alone some of those functions no longer work properly is even more of a pain. I am not talking about old code, I am referring to brand new projects the ability to have tightly typed data as an input parameter, allowing customizations to be saved by user is huge. all this by adding a setting. yes you could do the same thing by having layers of ini files, but why? the ability is there with settings and its all managed for us and its easy to work with. Ever try binding an ini to a property grid with 4 lines of code? you can with app.config

          L J 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • T trkchk

            what is wrong? nothing! but what is right? being forced to use kernel calls and the limitations of them, let alone some of those functions no longer work properly is even more of a pain. I am not talking about old code, I am referring to brand new projects the ability to have tightly typed data as an input parameter, allowing customizations to be saved by user is huge. all this by adding a setting. yes you could do the same thing by having layers of ini files, but why? the ability is there with settings and its all managed for us and its easy to work with. Ever try binding an ini to a property grid with 4 lines of code? you can with app.config

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #8

            chodi wrote:

            being forced to use kernel calls and the limitations of them

            There are no kernel calls (beyond file I/O) in either system. And the use of app.config versus .ini is purely a choice of the application developers. Neither system is better than the other.

            T 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              chodi wrote:

              being forced to use kernel calls and the limitations of them

              There are no kernel calls (beyond file I/O) in either system. And the use of app.config versus .ini is purely a choice of the application developers. Neither system is better than the other.

              T Offline
              T Offline
              trkchk
              wrote on last edited by
              #9

              Those are the ones I am referring to. Currently some do not work, and others require the first line to be blank. I was under the impression they are or were to be depreciated by MS with Windows 8 and removed entirely in 10, can anyone confirm? And for the record, I do not use them unless I am caught, my borrowed and updated routine is much better

              J 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • T trkchk

                what is wrong? nothing! but what is right? being forced to use kernel calls and the limitations of them, let alone some of those functions no longer work properly is even more of a pain. I am not talking about old code, I am referring to brand new projects the ability to have tightly typed data as an input parameter, allowing customizations to be saved by user is huge. all this by adding a setting. yes you could do the same thing by having layers of ini files, but why? the ability is there with settings and its all managed for us and its easy to work with. Ever try binding an ini to a property grid with 4 lines of code? you can with app.config

                J Offline
                J Offline
                jschell
                wrote on last edited by
                #10

                chodi wrote:

                the ability to have tightly typed data as an input parameter

                First most of it isn't "tightly typed" at least not the way I define it. If you are just reading values out of the app.config and doing zero business validation of them then I suspect you are going to wake up to a surprise someday. Second have you ever created a ill-formed app.config? What happens to your application when you do that? Might note that although it is possible to make a ill-formed ini it is much, much more difficult to do.

                chodi wrote:

                and its easy to work with

                You ever work with a custom part of a app.config? "Easy" is not the term I would use to apply to it.

                chodi wrote:

                . Ever try binding an ini to a property grid with 4 lines of code? you can with app.config

                I don't put user configurations in app.config files or ini files for that matter. So obviously your case would never be relevant to me.

                T 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • T trkchk

                  Those are the ones I am referring to. Currently some do not work, and others require the first line to be blank. I was under the impression they are or were to be depreciated by MS with Windows 8 and removed entirely in 10, can anyone confirm? And for the record, I do not use them unless I am caught, my borrowed and updated routine is much better

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  jschell
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #11

                  chodi wrote:

                  Those are the ones I am referring to. Currently some do not work

                  There is of course a very large difference between saying one type is better than the other versus whether the built in api no longer works. However creating a ini file reader should be an exercise in triviality for an experienced developer. I can do it all of the languages I know with the possible exception of SQL (where it could be done but I just don't know how off hand). And as a matter fact I am rather certain have in fact created my own ini APIs in the past.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • J jschell

                    chodi wrote:

                    the ability to have tightly typed data as an input parameter

                    First most of it isn't "tightly typed" at least not the way I define it. If you are just reading values out of the app.config and doing zero business validation of them then I suspect you are going to wake up to a surprise someday. Second have you ever created a ill-formed app.config? What happens to your application when you do that? Might note that although it is possible to make a ill-formed ini it is much, much more difficult to do.

                    chodi wrote:

                    and its easy to work with

                    You ever work with a custom part of a app.config? "Easy" is not the term I would use to apply to it.

                    chodi wrote:

                    . Ever try binding an ini to a property grid with 4 lines of code? you can with app.config

                    I don't put user configurations in app.config files or ini files for that matter. So obviously your case would never be relevant to me.

                    T Offline
                    T Offline
                    trkchk
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #12

                    If you are just reading values out of the app.config and doing zero business validation of them then I suspect you are going to wake up to a surprise someday. never, validation is needed for everything. but isn't it nice to know your data is an integer when you define it as such and don't need to convert from a string? Second have you ever created a ill-formed app.config? What happens to your application when you do that? many many times, more so in 2010. obviously the app will not work, or work properly. backups are a wonderful thing when you remember to use them You ever work with a custom part of a app.config? "Easy" is not the term I would use to apply to it. Actually that is how I started with them, honestly not all that bad, a pain yes. maybe I should also add my question is not fully explained, the powers that be, want to store all data in ini files related to any customization or settings by control, by form, by app, by user, by group instead of one app.config

                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • T trkchk

                      If you are just reading values out of the app.config and doing zero business validation of them then I suspect you are going to wake up to a surprise someday. never, validation is needed for everything. but isn't it nice to know your data is an integer when you define it as such and don't need to convert from a string? Second have you ever created a ill-formed app.config? What happens to your application when you do that? many many times, more so in 2010. obviously the app will not work, or work properly. backups are a wonderful thing when you remember to use them You ever work with a custom part of a app.config? "Easy" is not the term I would use to apply to it. Actually that is how I started with them, honestly not all that bad, a pain yes. maybe I should also add my question is not fully explained, the powers that be, want to store all data in ini files related to any customization or settings by control, by form, by app, by user, by group instead of one app.config

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      jschell
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #13

                      chodi wrote:

                      maybe I should also add my question is not fully explained, the powers that be, want to store all data in ini files related to any customization or settings by control, by form, by app, by user, by group instead of one app.config

                      Not sure what sort of app(s) you are working on but I absolutely would not want to store user customizations in the app.config.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups