From: Russell Hind (rh_gmane_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-21 03:49:50
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> All of above could (should?) be implemented more conviniently using
> Serialization Library. I believe program runtime parameters support has
> different goals and rationale. If you need bidirectional permanent store for
> some application state data - use serilization lib. If you need to read
> configuration from different sources and potencially only part of it - you
> need different solution. The difference is that in first case there is a
> direct correspondance between data in permanane storage and it's
> presentation at runtime within application (hence bidirectional). In later
> case I may have parametes comming from different sources conflict with each
> other and I may want ot use only 1 in 1000 of them. And this is runtime
> parameters domain. Intended to be covered by PO library (failed IMO, but
> again that's a different story)
We do use serialization for this currently to XML values, but not all
the values in our config files are available via the UI because under
normal circumstances, they don't need to be tweaked, but we still need
access to them at some point.
Therefore if the config file is human read-able, these can be tweaked
without need for extra UI.
We currently use XML archives with serialization for this, but because
of class/type ids etc and other info serialization squirts out, this
files can easily be screwed up.
This solution seems much neater to me.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk