I may miss something… but when I use the documented way for saving local data the simulator accesses my Macs ~/Documents folder… I would greatly prefer another folder (configurable?) because of multiple reasons! [import]uid: 6928 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 301144[/import]
I second that. [import]uid: 5712 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 2967[/import]
Case #252 opened [import]uid: 54 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 3180[/import]
Well … It is in Beta 6 … but can anybody from the team tell me why we could not just create that Directory where the project itself is located?
Now we need to watch and clean up “Application Support” for every single little test project we just needed once and have to track which Project gets which strange “number”…
You could at least have made the Name include the directory name… as it seems to be based on it’s path anyway (md5 of the path?).
Yeah… I know I am complaining instead of being happy… But this implementation is sup-optimal imho… who is testing that stuff? [import]uid: 6928 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 4010[/import]
The Corona simulator sandbox folders are created the same way as Apple’s iPhone simulator folders. The goal was to move the files out of the user’s Documents folder. [import]uid: 7559 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 4011[/import]
Well… I can make a list of stuff apple did sub-optimal any day…
And… The Data was not in the documents folder… the base path was the “home” of the user running the
simulator… the “Document” path you got from the simulator was the one which ended up in the document folder.
MY goal (and I requested that feature here) was that it is not in the same folder for every single project. And also not just “flat” in the documents folder.
I think it would be much easier to handle to have the data inside a folder of the project-directory.
This would end up in the document folder too (for my system). But inside the project folder! Where I can easily check and modify the data while debugging.
But as I said… I should be happy that my requested feature was worked on in the first place. [import]uid: 6928 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 4015[/import]
I second the current Beta6 implementation, although with an easy change:
Please add a prefix to the folder name. Hash is good as it’s guaranteed to be unique but it’s not human-readable. Something like: AppName_ProjectFolderHash would make the trick, IMHO. [import]uid: 5750 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 4092[/import]
Assigned as feature #310.
Thanks for the feedback. [import]uid: 7559 topic_id: 1144 reply_id: 4093[/import]