User Settings vs Application Settings vs Resources in Visual Studio 2008

Question

I'm a little confused by the different ways Visual Studio allows dynamic values to be saved to a project, and how they are intended to be used.

I understand that if I need to include binary information like an image or a sound file with my application I need to add that to a resource file. But if I'm saving something like a file path as a string why should I use or not use a string in a resource file over a string in an application settings (app.config) file or a user settings (myapp.dll.config) file?

Dubbin

Answer 1

Sorry for the resurrection, but there's another factor to consider that I don't think has been mentioned:

Users can tamper with config to their hearts content - which means that you either have to validate the values in there, or ensure that whatever uses them doesn't care if they're nonsense. I doubt resources files are incorruptible either - I know it's possible to extract values from them, but whether or not it's possible to replace them without recompiling, I don't know. In any case, if you don't want the user changing those values without a concerted effort, go for resources. If you want to enable or even encourage after-market tweaking of settings, go for app settings.

Acclivity

Answer 2

Typically it is better to use a config file for things that are likely to change with every deployment. That way if you ever need to change that file path, you won't need to recompile.

Cynthea

Ok good point so to change a resource you'd need to recompile, but to change an application/user setting you only need to change the XML settings file. – Dubbin

Correct. Config files are best for storing environment-specific settings, which will depend on the installation. This may include file paths, database connection strings, and URI's for services which may change. This leaves a stable build in tact. – Cynthea