FROM : Eric Gorr
DATE : Fri Jul 11 21:27:05 2008
On Jul 11, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Gary L. Wade wrote:
> It's really up to you and the kinds of changes that you expect to
> happen between each version. Having a single ID allows preferences
> to be mixed and matched if different versions of the product are
> used, but if you want to support the simultaneous use of last year's
> version and this year's version, or a pro and lite version, then
> that can get in the way.
Assuming the CFPreferences API is being used, one can pass in a custom
application id as a CFString. So, it would seem that if the behavior
one wanted was to have a different preference file for a different
version of an application, passing in an application id with version
information appended to it would be the way to go - as opposed to
declaring a unique custom identifier and using the
kCFPreferencesCurrentApplication constant with the CFPreferences API.
Of course, using a custom application id would likely have the side
effect that the OS would not be able to directly connect the
preference file to the application (assuming the OS does or would ever
make the attempt), but the code should work properly. But, perhaps
this would work correctly if the bundle identifier was
com.mycompany.myapp
and the custom application id passed into CFPreferences functions was:
com.mycompany.myapp.2009
DATE : Fri Jul 11 21:27:05 2008
On Jul 11, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Gary L. Wade wrote:
> It's really up to you and the kinds of changes that you expect to
> happen between each version. Having a single ID allows preferences
> to be mixed and matched if different versions of the product are
> used, but if you want to support the simultaneous use of last year's
> version and this year's version, or a pro and lite version, then
> that can get in the way.
Assuming the CFPreferences API is being used, one can pass in a custom
application id as a CFString. So, it would seem that if the behavior
one wanted was to have a different preference file for a different
version of an application, passing in an application id with version
information appended to it would be the way to go - as opposed to
declaring a unique custom identifier and using the
kCFPreferencesCurrentApplication constant with the CFPreferences API.
Of course, using a custom application id would likely have the side
effect that the OS would not be able to directly connect the
preference file to the application (assuming the OS does or would ever
make the attempt), but the code should work properly. But, perhaps
this would work correctly if the bundle identifier was
com.mycompany.myapp
and the custom application id passed into CFPreferences functions was:
com.mycompany.myapp.2009
| Related mails | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Eric Gorr | Jul 11, 18:40 | |
| Gary L. Wade | Jul 11, 18:58 | |
| Douglas Davidson | Jul 11, 19:01 | |
| Clark Cox | Jul 11, 19:29 | |
| Eric Gorr | Jul 11, 20:54 | |
| Douglas Davidson | Jul 11, 21:18 | |
| Eric Gorr | Jul 11, 21:27 |






Cocoa mail archive

