See my previous mail. I use that in QML all the time. I guess it’s up to you, as an app developer, to decide what fits your app. In spirit with agile software development, I start of with the easies possible solution, with as little friction as possible and take it from there. The QSettings (with QML wrapper) has served me well, and I could focus my time on other parts of the app instead :)
//bob On 29 dec 2013, at 10:08, Franck Routier (perso) <a...@mecadu.org> wrote: > Le 28/12/2013 19:06, Artem Marchenko a écrit : > >> If you want something QML that works, I use this pure QML LocalStorage >> approach for the last couple of years fine >> - >> https://github.com/amarchen/Wikipedia/blob/master/src/qml/components/DbDictionary.qml > > I found inbetween that this is the approach promoted (for now) by Ubuntu > Touch as well. >> >> Nowadays I would have started with wrapping QSettings though (and pull >> requests to Wikipedia for changing LocalStorage use into QSettings >> wrapper are welcome :)) >> > So as I understand it, QSettings might be better, but is not yet really > usable from QML out of the box (needs a wrapper of some sort, some being > developped by Nokia for example). > > But, what makes QSettings better thant LocalStorage ? Ans what makes > LocalStorage better than QSettings ? > > here are my first bets: > > LocalStorage: > (+) available in qml out of the box, more standard (HTML5 ??), more > powerful (sql) > (-) not directly human readable / editable, security concerns (all > tables available to all qml apps ??) > > QSettings: > (+) simple text files (?) > (-) not directly usable from qml > > there must be some other points... > > Best regards, > > Franck > _______________________________________________ > SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list _______________________________________________ SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
