OpenG ini file issues

[0_o]

Hi, 

I tried using the openg ini vis and here is my two cents feedback:

1. Read operation locks the file and doesn't open it as read-only, thus, blocking a write operation. There is no permission or access handling in the package

2. Even though a numeric variable should be represented as 4 and not as "4", for example, inside a cluster every variable is represented with " around it

3. Read/Write panel from/to ini is a great concept yet it needs to be debugged. I saw strange results from variant controls for example that got 2 lines but I wonder if it can deal with two controls with the same label, for example.

4. It would be nice if the open could have got a file reference from the general file open vi that will handle permission settings or any other file operation before the openg gets involved.

5. Some VIs require a type input yet even after they know the output type they still give out a variant. Maliablle VI?

Edited November 11, 2018 by 0_o

[hooovahh]

Those are all great suggestions.  The read/write panel could have other improvements too a list of controls to exclude, or an option to exclude indicators.  Do we really need to read and write the Error In/Out?  Most likely no.

The core of the code is using NI's configuration functions, which are fine for small files but for arrays of clusters of arrays it struggles.  OpenG Read/Write takes a long time for large data types that are heavily nested, or array based.  The MGI Read/Write Anything work much better when it comes to this.

[Michael Aivaliotis]

Do people still use ini files? I mean XML, Json? What is the consensus. Should any effort be put into this? Yes, the MGI tool is way faster. Yes, I'm derailing this post...

[crossrulz]

Yes, I still heavily use ini files.  Admittedly, I am starting to transition my code to use XML.

[Tim_S]

1 hour ago, Michael Aivaliotis said:

Do people still use ini files? I mean XML, Json? What is the consensus. Should any effort be put into this? Yes, the MGI tool is way faster. Yes, I'm derailing this post...

Whenever I have something that an average human is going to edit I use INI files. It's a lot harder to completely mess up and easier to understand for non-software types. Otherwise, I've shifted to JSON.

[0_o]

Since you asked... I personally don't use ini files.

I use MVC and thus all my controls are also in a class. 

I use traverse and save the class as a binary file. 

For config I use JSON or SQL.

However, some projects demand ini file config so here we are

[hooovahh]

I still have some legacy stuff that uses INI keys.  The users I trust, know how to edit them pretty easily.  Not saying they can't do the same for JSON but it is a more familiar looking format.  It's good and bad, but every operating system has a text editor.

[Porter]

I actually still use the OpenG ini library for a lot of my config files. As I recall, it's output was a bit more human-readable compared to the MGI ini format. Recently I've started to look at TOML as a possible replacement: https://github.com/erdosmiller/lv-toml

Of course JSON or XML could also work very well but they look a bit more intimidating to the non-technical user.

[Gribo]

I use JSON almost exclusively. A verbosely formatted JSON file is more readable than an INI file. Also, With JDPowell's JSON library, saving and loading any LV type is a breeze.