Viktor Szakáts wrote:
>
> I believe you all this, but it's very inelegant IMO
> to use two config files for above technical reasons. It's
> IMO our job to find proper solutions to such problems.
>
Yep, very inelegant, but I had no other choice.
I could not process Qt's byte-array to be returned as a
buffer of string. There are only two options, either supply
the filename of process a byte-array.
Probably someone can help in this direction.
> IMO it's not a problem at all that binary encoded as
> text is included in any .ini file. Simply users won't be
> able to touch it, as they are not able to touch the
> exact same content in hbide.set.
>
Yes, this can be documented, and I have included it in
FAQs section.
> The other sad thing which I can read out from your
> words is that hbide.ini is not a standard .ini file
> but it's manipulate using some unique methods, which
> don't allow for extra content to be preserved.
>
> I think this should be fixed.
>
Why it is "sad". User is never allowed to include the
contents of his choice in hbide.ini ( for historic reasons
I kept the extension .ini, it could been something else ),
as the contents of hbide.ini are subject to be re-written
at the time hbIDE exits, making it unfit for user-defined
contents.
However user can add/delete/modify the existing entries
but within the norms of hbide.( let_us_say_something_else ).
Probably we should not concentrate on this issue until
I find a way ( or someone else ) to get back byte-array
as string.
Thank you for peeping deep.
-----
enjoy hbIDEing...
Pritpal Bedi
_a_student_of_software_analysis_&_design_
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/hbide-testing-go-2-tp4671197p4690923.html
Sent from the harbour-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
