Not sure if this is the right forum for this:

1. I would have liked to have seen a choice offered before installing on where mIRC will store the settings in "Application Data/mIRC" or in the mIRC directory, like many other programs do.

2. $mircdir will now return the "Application data/mIRC" path, instead of the path mIRC is installed in. I assume mIRC checks for the location of the ini file, since copying that to the mIRC directory fixes this, but shouldn't $mircdir always refer to the directory mIRC is installed in?

That wouldn't be appropriate for Windows Vista.


I guess this change was made so that older scripts worked well under new installations without having to update them. $nofile($mircexe) should work well (I haven't tested it), but maybe a new identifier would be nice.

Indeed, you might find some other replies about this useful, in this thread. Not quite sure how either of these are bug reports though.

Regards,

Not according to the help file:

$mircdir
Returns the directory where mIRC stores its settings, such as mirc.ini, and other files and folders.


Older versions' help files state:

$mircdir
Returns the current directory of the mIRC program.

"current directory" was never defined as the directory mirc.exe is in. The -r command-line switch (which existed long before 6.3) illustrates the difference.

I think it's more appropriate for $mircdir to return the directory of the mIRC settings. There's not really any need to know the directory the program is in as far as I can see, but if you need to you can use $nofile($mircexe)

1. Why?
2. Not everybody uses windows vista.

*sigh* It wouldn't be appropriate for Windows Vista and any other recent version of Windows, it's just that Vista practically forces you to do it the right way. There? Windows applications should use the Application Data folder to store their settings.

Just because Vista has decided to be hitler about it, that doesnt mean its impossible to do, and it certainly doesnt mean the option should not be there for those that use older versions of Windows.

I know perfectly well how Vista functions in this manner, but i do not agree that its reason enough for such a small program to force the behavior on non-vista users. I do not believe in the logic behind excluding a feature based on one-of-many operating system versions having 'almost' no use for it.