outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post Reply
User avatar
Josef Templ
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:50 am

outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by Josef Templ »

There are several issues listed in the change protocol for CPC 1.7 that need a discussion.
The first one refers to number 58: "Change style of edit field Patch for HostCFrames (Open Points #04)"
The extra border around text fields is removed for text fields that have a height greater than dropDownHeight.

There are two questions:
1. why only for fields that have a height greater than dropDownHeight?
2. why do we need this change at all? The comment says that it is needed in order to create a look as in Windows XP.
But such a look can be obtained easily by removing the manifest file from the root directory.
The manifest file specifies that ComCtls.dll version 6 is to be used. If the manifest does not exist,
BB uses version 5 and that is XP style.
It should be noted that there are more (subtle) differences between version 5 and 6 than just the border around text fields.
If XP style common controls are required, it is easily achieved by removing the manifest.

As far as I see it, this change should be ignored.

- Josef
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by DGDanforth »

Seems reasonable to ignore it.
Perhaps more input from those who created the issue is needed.
-Doug
User avatar
Josef Templ
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:50 am

Re: outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by Josef Templ »

The next questions are regarding changes in the registry (HostRegistry) and its usage (number 35, 36).

1. CPC 1.7 adds a new command line switch /PORTABLE for using a file instead of using the Windows registry.
What is this option needed for?
Why is it called "PORTABLE"?

2. All the registry entries are stored under a different key which now also includes the
subsystem and the module name.
This is a change that affects all installations, i.e. all your settings are lost and must be set again.
Why is this needed?

- Josef
Zinn
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 5:56 pm
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Contact:

Re: outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by Zinn »

Josef Templ wrote: 1. CPC 1.7 adds a new command line switch /PORTABLE for using a file instead of using the Windows registry.
What is this option needed for?
Why is it called "PORTABLE"?
I often use BlackBox via USB-stick on PC's where BlackBox is not installed.
I won't left entries into the registry about BlackBox.
Further I won't redo my setup every time again.
This future I need.
Of course we can define another keyword. Have you a better name?
Josef Templ wrote: 2. All the registry entries are stored under a different key which now also includes the
subsystem and the module name.
This is a change that affects all installations, i.e. all your settings are lost and must be set again.
Why is this needed?
Long time ago I often work with the registry and I would like to know where the key is used without searching thou BlackBox.
But the time is changing. Today I seldom work with the registry. So it is not so important.
User avatar
Josef Templ
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:50 am

Re: outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by Josef Templ »

Zinn wrote: I often use BlackBox via USB-stick on PC's where BlackBox is not installed.
I won't left entries into the registry about BlackBox.
Further I won't redo my setup every time again.
This future I need.
Of course we can define another keyword. Have you a better name?
In general, I think, the command line parameter should mention the registry or the INI file in some way.
One candidate therefore would be "NOREG", which means "no Windows registry changes".
Other candidates would be "USEINI", or "INIFILE". But these latter candidates would fit better
if we also specify the INI file name explicitly. In CPC 1.7 the INI file name is implicitly
specified by the name of the application. So I would prefer "NOREG".

- Josef
Zinn
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 5:56 pm
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Contact:

Re: outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by Zinn »

I like the idea to specify INI file name explicitly.
User avatar
Josef Templ
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:50 am

Re: outstanding issues from CPC 1.7

Post by Josef Templ »

Then let us use /INIFILE <path>.
We also need to think about where to look for the file if it
does not contain an absolute path name.
Helmut, can you provide us a proposal?

- Josef
Post Reply