Encapsulate registry keys more consistently#18608
Merged
Merged
Conversation
seanbudd
commented
Aug 4, 2025
Member
Author
|
pre-commit.ci run |
seanbudd
commented
Aug 4, 2025
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR encapsulates NVDA's Windows registry keys into a more unified and consistent approach. The main purpose is to consolidate registry key definitions into a single location to prepare for 64-bit migration, where legacy 32-bit registry keys will need to be accessed from 64-bit versions.
Key changes include:
- Moving all major NVDA registry keys into
config.registry.RegistryKey - Deprecating
easeOfAccess.RegistryKeyin favor of the unified approach - Removing usage of reserved 0 parameter in
winreg.OpenKey()calls
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 13 out of 13 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| user_docs/en/changes.md | Documents deprecation of old RegistryKey classes |
| source/config/registry.py | New unified registry key definitions with x86 variant for legacy access |
| source/config/init.py | Updates deprecation warnings and removes old RegistryKey class |
| source/easeOfAccess.py | Migrates to use new registry keys and provides backward compatibility |
| source/winVersion.py | Uses centralized registry keys instead of hardcoded strings |
| source/systemUtils.py | Uses centralized registry keys for system clock visibility check |
| source/mathType.py | Removes reserved 0 parameter from winreg.OpenKey call |
| source/installer.py | Updates all registry operations to use new centralized keys |
| source/_remoteClient/urlHandler.py | Removes reserved 0 parameter from winreg.OpenKey call |
| source/_remoteClient/localMachine.py | Uses centralized registry keys for policy system paths |
| source/NVDAState.py | Updates imports to use new registry module |
| site_scons/site_tools/doxygen.py | Removes reserved 0 parameter from winreg.OpenKey call |
| sconstruct | Removes reserved 0 parameter from winreg.OpenKey call |
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
seanbudd
commented
Aug 4, 2025
SaschaCowley
requested changes
Aug 4, 2025
SaschaCowley
approved these changes
Aug 6, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Link to issue number:
Prep work for #16304
Summary of the issue:
Registry keys are not consistently encapsulated in the NVDA code base.
When migrating to 64bit, we need to be able to fetch legacy 32bit versions of registry keys from the 64bit version.
Having more clear encapsulation of registry keys will make this easier.
Description of user facing changes:
Description of developer facing changes:
Deprecates
easeOfAccess.RegistryKeyfor a more unified approachDescription of development approach:
config.RegistryKey. Create anx86version of this for use in the 64bit migration.winreg.REG_OPTION_RESERVEDbut this is not documented or part of the official python API. Rather than making a named constant, the value can only be the default value so it seems cleaner to drop it.Testing strategy:
Ensure nothing breaks in smoke testing
Known issues with pull request:
None
Code Review Checklist:
@coderabbitai summary