Re:Why the Windows Registry sucks technically (2010)
by trevorishere on Friday July 29, 2022 @08:54AM
(#32276232)
Application writers are free to use which ever format they choose on Windows, as well. The Registry is just yet another option -- Microsoft does not force developers to use it. I don't see the Unix convention as the more "liberal" one, here. It typically has _one less_ option.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why the Windows Registry sucks technically (2010)
by nomel on Friday July 29, 2022 @12:22PM
(#32278889)
> The Registry is just yet another option
It's not just "another option". It's a system standard option that exists, and can be easily accessed programmatically. There's no equivalent in Unix, since there is no standard, and whatever is available will depend on the distribution.
"Here's a built in option, but do whatever" is very different than "do whatever!".
Re:Why the Windows Registry sucks technically (2010)
by trevorishere on Friday July 29, 2022 @12:43PM
(#32279164)
Do you know where Microsoft calls out the Registry as the current best practice in https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/?
Re:Why the Windows Registry sucks technically (2010)
by nomel on Friday July 29, 2022 @04:02PM
(#32281206)
My point was that having something built into the system is very different than having a dependency stricken free for all that is outside of the system. For this reason, especially for the majority of Window's life, it was not just "another option", it was a "hey, this is built in" option.
As your link show, Windows has homogeneity, with good config options built into the frameworks. In those frameworks, those built in config options can't be consider just "another option". There's no real homogeneity in *nix, so the only options is misc files to put misc paths.