On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 3:27 AM, j o a r <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can you give a concrete example? I would argue that you're doing something > wrong if you ask your user to muck around in ~/Library. There are better > ways of solving the plugin problem - as demonstrated by both System > Preferences and Dashboard.
"Reveal in Finder". Always a better option than implementing my own half-assed file management utility when the user really wants to work with files. >> (As a side note, I'm not a fan of the naming scheme used for >> preference files. The hierarchical naming scheme used for preference >> files is merely conventional; they don't factor into the defaults >> hierarchy at all. The system also provides no conveniences just >> because there's a plist file whose name matches your app's bundle >> identifier.) > > > I'm not sure that I get what you're saying here, but I think I have to > disagree: The functionality of NSUserDefaults is directly tied to your > bundle identifier. This is true, but the user never sees that. It would be different if the system used that bundle identifier to find the display name of the associated application and used that for the preferences. (Ooh, enhancement request time!) > My comment was not on how the application itself would find it's support > folder. You suggested that using the name of the bundle would make it easier > for the user to find the support folder, and I argued that this is not > always the case - in particular for localized versions. If the app's bundle is localized, so too should its Application Support folder. http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/BPFileSystem/Articles/DisplayNames.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20002298-109019-CJBHCGGA > I don't agree. Using a predictable, rather than arbitrary, naming scheme for > auxiliary resources benefits everyone. I also get the added benefit of > having a unique name for my support folder, avoiding potential collisions. This is indeed a benefit. However, we're not talking about FourCCs here, we have a lot more room to work with. I don't believe that the potential for collisions is anywhere near the order of magnitude FourCCs has. > I don't think that we need to take this any further though. Let's just agree > to disagree. Agreed. :P Though I'm going to file that enhancement request anyway. I don't think that telling users to categorically avoid the ~/Library folder is a good idea. --Kyle Sluder _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
