From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:47:29 -0700

2009/6/29 Al Le <al.le_at_gmx.de>:
> On 30.06.2009 00:39, Jonathan Gordon wrote:
>>
>> 2009/6/29 Al Le <al.le_at_gmx.de>:
>>>
>>> On 30.06.2009 00:24, Paul Louden wrote:
>>>
>>>> And if a user then changes the setting back?
>>>
>>> Then the asterisk should disappear IMO. I.e. the "dirtyness" should be
>>> computed every time.
>>>
>>
>> There are over 180 settings (IIRC)... if even 20 have the theme
>> attribute that becomes a lot of added complexity for something which
>> isnt an issue...
>
> I don't see how the complexity depends on the number of the settings marked
> as "theme". It would be generic code (like the code for saving theme
> settings).
>

well, complexity isnt only code wise... You basically have two
options. either stick a dirty bit on every setting (uber-huge waste
there), or you split off just the theme settings and waste however is
needed there also.... you also have to waste RAM by storing the
original value so you can revert or know when a "revert" happened in
the settings...
Or you rape the settings saveing code by doing a load and compare on
the old file?
Received on 2009-06-30