From: Nielsen Linus (ext) <"Nielsen>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 07:51:45 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. OReilly [mailto:moreilly_at_moreilly.com]
> Sent: den 2 oktober 2002 07:42
> To: rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se
> Subject: RE: user editable keys binding schemes wanted
>
>
> If I am assuming correctly that the config file will be ASCII
> (i.e., not binary), is there any objection to making it user-editable?

The whole purpose with using ASCII is to make it user-editable.

> Sometimes it may be advantageous not to have to open the gui
> to make changes to the config file. The system won't care,
> but is there any reason we shouldn't do a traditional
> Windows-style .ini format?

Yes. That format it harder to parse, and unnecessary complex. The .INI file
format is intended to be machine-editable.

> This makes a whole lot more sense to me than a cryptic comma-delimited
> format...(No offense intended, Paul!)

How would the .INI format solve the problem? You suggested a format like:

[key bindings]
F2=something

What should "something" be? It would probably be:

F2=show_wps,down,500,yes,no,yes

What's the difference?

And I still think the file format is the least problem of them all. We can
change that a dozen times if we wish. The code is the hard part.

/Linus
Received on 2002-10-02