Re: beta/6

On Thursday 14 September 2000 Steve Lamb wrote: > On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 08:18:52PM +0100, John Sullivan wrote: >> It provides better data-type support > How? It is just key/value pairs. The values can be ints, strings, strings with environment variables, string lists, binary data and these

Re[2]: beta/6

Hello John, Thursday, September 14, 2000, 12:18:52 PM, you wrote: JS> I am! well there is always 1 :-) JS> It provides better data-type support, structured data storage, JS> per-user settings, access-control and more. Using the registry also JS> encourages good data/code separation, and good

Re: beta/6

On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 08:18:52PM +0100, John Sullivan wrote: > It provides better data-type support How? It is just key/value pairs. > structured data storage, No more than I get on a file system except that it isn't divorced from the file system. > per-user settings, I get th

Re: beta/6

On Thursday 14 September 2000 A . Curtis Martin wrote: > I don't think there's anyone really actively in favour of using the > registry I am! It provides better data-type support, structured data storage, per-user settings, access-control and more. Using the registry also encourages good data/co

Re[2]: beta/6

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Steve and everyone else... SL> This is security through obscurity and I'd hope that anyone dealing with SL> security would know that if you're relying upon obscurity for security, you've SL> failed before you started. Oh I agree, the regi

Re[2]: New TB FAQ site

Hello Bat people, on Thursday, September 14, 2000, 7:59:04 PM, Syafril Hermansyah wrote: Syafril> Weird, I just tried either or Syafril> work fine from here. Syafril> What happen ? Why you point out to

Re: beta/6

Hello Ming-Li and all you Batters out there. At Thursday, September 14, 2000, 6:30:23 PM, Ming-Li mashed together that: ML> On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 9:18:42 AM, Steve wrote: >>> I'm not so sure. If the registry or an easily separable part of >>> it contains only application specific data

Re: Intpack.exe is damaged

Hello Peter, Thursday, September 14, 2000, 5:05:50 PM, you wrote: PH> Hello Maxim, PH> this file: PH> 14.09.00 18:03 1.163.776 intpack.exe PH> seems to be damaged. At least that is what it says if you run it. I have PH> downloaded it twice - with no difference ... The ftp site

Re: New TB FAQ site

Hello Andreas Schwartmann, Responding to your article on Friday, September 15, 2000 at 19:35:42 GMT +0200 (which was 15/09/2000 0:35 GMT +0700 my Local Time) : MDP>>> Please let me know of any problems you have accessing the site or with MDP>>> the content. AS> http://www.marckp.redhotant.com/

Re[2]: New TB FAQ site

Hello Bat people, on Thursday, September 14, 2000, 7:17:41 PM, Syafril Hermansyah wrote: MDP>> Please let me know of any problems you have accessing the site or with MDP>> the content. http://www.marckp.redhotant.com/thebat/shortcut.eng : The page cannot be found The page you are looking for

Re: New TB FAQ site

Hello Marck D. Pearlstone, Responding to your article on Tuesday, September 12, 2000 at 15:01:24 GMT +0100 (which was 12/09/2000 21:01 GMT +0700 my Local Time) : MDP> Since Leif is going off-line for a while, we have taken the decision MDP> to move the TB FAQ web site. It can now be found a

Re: beta/6

Hello Jamie, On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 16:20:41 +0100 GMT (14/09/2000, 23:20 +0800 GMT), Jamie Dainton [Bat] wrote: JDB> it's released. Hopefully we'll be allowed to write plugins for V2. According to The Interview, we will. JDB> If that's true look out for Linux and Win plugins from me. Looking fo

DEAD HORSE (was Re: beta/6)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi tracer, On 14 September 2000 at 22:04:55 GMT +0700 (which was 16:04 where I live) tracer wrote and made these points on the subject of "beta/6": t> I guess because we keep asking for it and sofar I havent seen either a t> no or yes as response..

Re: beta/6

On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 9:18:42 AM, Steve wrote: >> I'm not so sure. If the registry or an easily separable part of >> it contains only application specific data (aka a superset of all >> INIs), then it's also quite portable, isn't it? > This assumes you can /find/ the data in the f

V2 under Linux (was: beta/6)

Hello Jamie, Thursday, September 14, 2000, you wrote to me: TF>> That's my point. TB doesn't run under Linux (yet). ;- JDB> V2 will probably written in Delphi 5. JDB> Inprise are definitely releasing Delphi 5 for Linux soon. Do you really believe that V2 will ever arrive? I heard from Max abou

Re: beta/6

On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 09:17:43AM -0700, Ming-Li wrote: > I'm not so sure. If the registry or an easily separable part of it > contains only application specific data (aka a superset of all > INIs), then it's also quite portable, isn't it? This assumes you can /find/ the data in the first pl

Re: beta/6

On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 8:18:30 AM, Steve wrote: >> Exactly my point on the flip side: what can be accomplished with >> ini can also be accomplished be registry, theoretically. > Easily moving from one computer to another is not one of them. > Surviving an OS reinstall (basically th