[Lazarus] Why was XML format chosen for storing settings in Lazarus IDE?

[Alexander Klenin]

On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 02:45, Hans-Peter Diettrich
<DrDiettrich1 at aol.com> wrote:
> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> Actually I'm struggling with Mattias, about the many (obsolete) classes and
> methods in the Lazarus IDE. IMO the IDE would profit from a general
> refactoring, but who would do that, and who would make the result only work
> again? Not to mention the many changes that are on the road with the new
> (dockable) layout management.

This is a serious problem for Lazarus development, but the need for stability
and backwards compatibility should not be underestimated either.
I can make a few suggestions:
1) Take a small steps, one a a time. Really. First eliminate obvious duplicates
and other most trivial design problems. Then *get those changes accepted*,
after that, move to more serious refactorings.
2) Ask for forgiveness, not permission.
My attempts to start a meaningful refactoring of some core IDE code
were halted by core developers due to fear of potential backwards compatibility
problems. Meanwhile, I quietly rewrote almost 100% of TAChart code,
introducing some (hopefully minor) incompatibilities,
and AFAIR got a single complaint on forum,
which was promptly resolved, and not even by me.

To access the magnitude of change, compare this:
http://github.com/graemeg/lazarus/blob/4a181e6bda93a20797630f16a5103fff85ad46da/components/tachart/taseries.pas#L594
with that:
http://github.com/graemeg/lazarus/blob/upstream/components/tachart/taseries.pas#L360

I have a nagging suspicion that if I'd just committed my attempted
core refactoring,
nobody would ever notice ;-)

-- 
Alexander S. Klenin