Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 11th Jan 2009 10:54 UTC, submitted by Hiev
Mono Project Arstechnica reports that Mono, an open source implementation of .NET runtime, is bringing Microsoft's development technologies to some unexpected places, including the iPhone, Android, and the Wii.
Thread beginning with comment 343107
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
google_ninja
Member since:
2006-02-05

Look at *anything* in all of system.configuration. There are a few hundred classes, all of which have to do with app.config and user.config, not the registry

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.configuration.aspx

a google of "configuration .net" would have led you to about 37 million pages all talking about it, again, nothing to do with the registry

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enCA309CA309&sa=X&oi=...

If you don't want to wade through millions of blog posts, here is a pretty good tutorial on codeproject, complete with examples on how to use the configuration api. Again, nothing to do with the registry

http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cs/SystemConfiguration.aspx

Reply Parent Score: 2

adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

These links do not state that app.config and user.config are meant replace storage of configuration that is handled by the registry in .Net applications.

I have posted in this thread about those APIs and are nothing new to me. What you still haven't proven is that MS expects .Net developers to use these classes and not the registry! Get it?

-Ad

Reply Parent Score: 0

lsls Member since:
2006-11-13

These links do not state that app.config and user.config are meant replace storage of configuration that is handled by the registry in .Net applications.

I have posted in this thread about those APIs and are nothing new to me. What you still haven't proven is that MS expects .Net developers to use these classes and not the registry! Get it?


I did not make such a claim. I just showed you that for writing .net applications the use of the registry is not mandatory as you incorrectly claimed, since the framework offers other ways of handling application settings. Get it?

Reply Parent Score: 1

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

I did, the MSDN on System.Configuration. They use a Facade pattern for the API with the ConfigurationManager class (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.configuration.config...)

Reply Parent Score: 3

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

This is null and void on a few levels:

a google of "configuration .net" would have led you to about 37 million pages all talking about it, again, nothing to do with the registry

Great, except this has absolutely nothing to do with configuration of the application. It is about persistable settings and data that needs to be read and written by the application in a reasonably fluid way (short of using a database). App.config does not fit this use case and Microsoft will disown you if you try. If you'd read any of those pages you would have found that out.

Again, nothing to do with the registry

You keep writing 'nothing to do with the registry' as if that will somehow magicallymake every .Net application ported to Mono Ok, but it doesn't as has been consistently pointed out in this thread, explain why Mono has had to engineer registry support in if .Net applications have 'nothing to do with the registry'. The above use case that I have described, I would hazard a very good guess, is exactly why.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lsls Member since:
2006-11-13

explain why Mono has had to engineer registry support in if .Net applications have 'nothing to do with the registry'.


Mono implemented registry support because it is a matter of fact that there are .net applications out there using it. By implementing registry support, application vendors which want to make their applications available on Linux can do it more easily since they don't have to create their own portable settings management library.

It is also a matter of fact that .NET applications are not forced to use the registry in order to store applications settings, as the comment that triggered this whole discussion misleadingly implied. Applications written for .NET 2.0 can take advantage of the app settings support provided by the new api. I've never seen an application written with Mono that makes use of the registry.

Reply Parent Score: 1

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Great, except this has absolutely nothing to do with configuration of the application. It is about persistable settings and data that needs to be read and written by the application in a reasonably fluid way (short of using a database). App.config does not fit this use case and Microsoft will disown you if you try. If you'd read any of those pages you would have found that out.


So configuration doesn't have anything to do with configuration? It isn't just app.config, it is app.config and user.config, both are xml files, and both have very rich APIs around them.

You keep writing 'nothing to do with the registry' as if that will somehow magicallymake every .Net application ported to Mono Ok, but it doesn't as has been consistently pointed out in this thread, explain why Mono has had to engineer registry support in if .Net applications have 'nothing to do with the registry'. The above use case that I have described, I would hazard a very good guess, is exactly why.


You *can* store it in the registry if you want to, you can also store it in a database, or just serialize the objects to a file and rehydrate them when the app starts up again. You could also roll your own string class, use something different then ADO.net as low level data access, or create your own GUI toolkit.

The "Best Practices" way to do it is through the System.Configuration api. That api does handle user specific settings for users with admin permission.

Reply Parent Score: 2