[josm-dev] control characters in config file

[Dirk Stöcker]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Alan Mintz wrote:

>> The workarounds have been removed some months ago. There should be nothing 
>> left. If there is, tell where and file a bug-report.
>
> I don't really understand what that means. I am saying there are different 
> separators visibly present, with different logical meanings (i.e. some 
> separate values within a group, some separate groups, etc.). I don't 
> understand what could be "wrong" - it is what it is.

There probably are old fields, which use own methods to join data into a 
string. All of these places are outdated and need to be fixed. Thought all 
of these fixes mean a lot of work to convert the old values, so this only 
goes step by step.

You can add bug-reports for each type of settings where other separators 
are used. Thought also in future there may be places where it is easier to 
design an own preferences string than to use the collection or array
functionality.

>> And this will remain undocumented, as this is a internal file format, which 
>> a user must not change.
>
> Not sure how documenting it could allow a user to "change" it - simply make 
> it possible to edit the file manually, which many of us have been doing. If 
> you are saying you want to prevent that, that's a different story, which I 
> again have no particular problem with.

Internal structures are subject to change and always will be. You don't 
document them to the user, as everything you document the user will rely 
on. Every user should be aware of the fact, that directly editing 
configuration files can be dangerous. I do not prevent it, but I also do 
not encourage it by documenting it.

>> What are you talking about? As I told already the advanced preferences 
>> allow you to enter collection values. Simply select value and press edit.
>
> If I had known that, it would be different. As it was, before I wrote, I 
> double-clicked on the right-side (value) field as I always have and got the 
> usual single-row editable field there. Had I taken the longer route of 
> clicking the row to select it, then clicking the Edit button (does anyone do 
> this normally?), or double-clicked on the left-side (key) field, I'd have 
> seen the nice new collection editor to which you refer.

Well, I didn't want to drop the "in-table-edit" totally, as most values 
are indeed plain strings.

Ciao
-- 
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)