4 ms·

YAML is definitely the hotness right now but it works. No need to invent a full blown language for something like this. Way easier than trying to write json.

mst 11y ago
> Way easier than trying to write json. Which is why ingy and I invented http://p3rl.org/JSONY http://p3rl.org/JSONY for config files.
eropple 11y ago
Or you can use Ruby or Python and Perl and have a scripting language that looks and acts as a scripting language is generally expected to look and act. (And with Ruby in particular it's very easy to provide a flexible and terse DSL that provides significant benefits on its own.) This "invent your own worse programming language" fad is disappointing.
- mst 11y ago
  For plain config, I mostly use JSONY now. For executable declarationish things, I like Tcl (usually embedded in perl so I can use Moo(se) for OO rather than the inferior crap in other languages). Hashicorp's HCL is an interesting middle ground.
  - eropple 11y ago
    I can respect Tcl. I'm not super familiar with it aside from hacking on eggdrop, but it's in the same ballpark. For configuration, I just source a shell script and grab env vars wherever I can. It's the most portable (between applications, not necessarily between platforms) option available to me and plays nicely with stuff like jails. At a glance, I don't quite understand the value prop of JSONY over YAML, which (as you see used in something like Rails) allows for a good bit of flexibility with references to more tersely communicate intent. I think HCL is one of the worse decisions made by a somewhat influential software company in quite some time. It's harder to use than YAML (which is funny because the stated reason for its existence is "YAML is harder", and it makes me really, really curious what sort of users they're polling) while being less expressive and they're very careful to not really care about anybody's interop "because you can just use JSON instead", except that, as trying to work with Terraform amply proved, no, you can't use JSON, because that path isn't tested because nobody cares and unit tests are hard. =( HCL is a regular problem in my life. I needed to vent a little.
    - crdoconnor 11y ago
      >for configuration, I just source a shell script and grab env vars wherever I can. That can cause you headaches when you want to store lists or associative data in your config.
- kentonv 11y ago
  > This "invent your own worse programming language" fad is disappointing. Fad? This has been a common anti-pattern basically since the dawn of computing. :)
  - eropple 11y ago
    Fine, fine. Boondoggle?
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  >Or you can use Ruby or Python and Perl Then you get turing completeness, and turing completeness harms readability and makes your language a magnet for technical debt. This is why most of us these days use an intentionally dumb language to template HTML (another non-turing complete language). The alternative was a god-awful fucking mess (remember PHP without a framework/templating language?). This is what Tim Berners Lee alluded to with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_least_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_least_power Here's my example (yes, I'm one of those people): http://hitchtest.com/ http://hitchtest.com/ I don't think you could write a cleaner, more readable parameterized test case in python. >This "invent your own worse programming language" fad is disappointing. There's a lot of disasters out there for sure (in the testing world as well =), but I'm pretty happy to see custom YAML-based declarative languages catching on. I think Ansible states are, likewise, way easier to deal with than the equivalent in python would end up being.
  - smw 11y ago
    You're making the same exact mistake that the guy who decided ant should use xml as a programming language did. As soon as you need loops, conditionals, subroutines -- which are all very common when writing tests -- you're making up your own language with horrible warts.
    - crdoconnor 11y ago
      >You're making the same exact mistake that the guy who decided ant should use xml as a programming language did. Ant was a badly done turing complete langauge. I did not create a turing complete language I created an very, very dumb declarative language with no functions or control structures - only data. >As soon as you need loops, conditionals, subroutines -- which are all very common when writing tests I already have loops and conditionals via jinja2 (a templating language I did not create) on the high level and in python on the step level. I am not and will never implementing any control structures in YAML (a la ant). The YAML will always remain dumb to help maintain a strict separation of concerns and test readability. >you're making up your own language with horrible warts. Warts such as what?
zobzu 11y ago
not sure how yaml is easier than json also not sure how yaml is easier than python or what not
- lnkmails 11y ago
  StackStorm developer here! Just to clarify, YAML is one way to write the workflow spec. Just like how YAML is way to write docker compose file. We picked YAML over JSON because it is less verbose and allows one to add comments which is pretty useful if someone is looking at a remediation workflow early in the AM. We do use YAQL expressions for some variable manipulation but that is not a YAML spec. A workflow is a collection of actions and actions can be written in almost any language (as a script) or python (first class actions). So you can think YAML workflow as a declarative spec rather than a programming language. Maybe that helps?

mst 11y ago

> Way easier than trying to write json. Which is why ingy and I invented http://p3rl.org/JSONY http://p3rl.org/JSONY for config files.

eropple 11y ago

Or you can use Ruby or Python and Perl and have a scripting language that looks and acts as a scripting language is generally expected to look and act. (And with Ruby in particular it's very easy to provide a flexible and terse DSL that provides significant benefits on its own.) This "invent your own worse programming language" fad is disappointing.

mst 11y ago
For plain config, I mostly use JSONY now. For executable declarationish things, I like Tcl (usually embedded in perl so I can use Moo(se) for OO rather than the inferior crap in other languages). Hashicorp's HCL is an interesting middle ground.
- eropple 11y ago
  I can respect Tcl. I'm not super familiar with it aside from hacking on eggdrop, but it's in the same ballpark. For configuration, I just source a shell script and grab env vars wherever I can. It's the most portable (between applications, not necessarily between platforms) option available to me and plays nicely with stuff like jails. At a glance, I don't quite understand the value prop of JSONY over YAML, which (as you see used in something like Rails) allows for a good bit of flexibility with references to more tersely communicate intent. I think HCL is one of the worse decisions made by a somewhat influential software company in quite some time. It's harder to use than YAML (which is funny because the stated reason for its existence is "YAML is harder", and it makes me really, really curious what sort of users they're polling) while being less expressive and they're very careful to not really care about anybody's interop "because you can just use JSON instead", except that, as trying to work with Terraform amply proved, no, you can't use JSON, because that path isn't tested because nobody cares and unit tests are hard. =( HCL is a regular problem in my life. I needed to vent a little.
  - crdoconnor 11y ago
    >for configuration, I just source a shell script and grab env vars wherever I can. That can cause you headaches when you want to store lists or associative data in your config.
kentonv 11y ago
> This "invent your own worse programming language" fad is disappointing. Fad? This has been a common anti-pattern basically since the dawn of computing. :)
- eropple 11y ago
  Fine, fine. Boondoggle?
crdoconnor 11y ago
>Or you can use Ruby or Python and Perl Then you get turing completeness, and turing completeness harms readability and makes your language a magnet for technical debt. This is why most of us these days use an intentionally dumb language to template HTML (another non-turing complete language). The alternative was a god-awful fucking mess (remember PHP without a framework/templating language?). This is what Tim Berners Lee alluded to with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_least_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_least_power Here's my example (yes, I'm one of those people): http://hitchtest.com/ http://hitchtest.com/ I don't think you could write a cleaner, more readable parameterized test case in python. >This "invent your own worse programming language" fad is disappointing. There's a lot of disasters out there for sure (in the testing world as well =), but I'm pretty happy to see custom YAML-based declarative languages catching on. I think Ansible states are, likewise, way easier to deal with than the equivalent in python would end up being.
- smw 11y ago
  You're making the same exact mistake that the guy who decided ant should use xml as a programming language did. As soon as you need loops, conditionals, subroutines -- which are all very common when writing tests -- you're making up your own language with horrible warts.
  - crdoconnor 11y ago
    >You're making the same exact mistake that the guy who decided ant should use xml as a programming language did. Ant was a badly done turing complete langauge. I did not create a turing complete language I created an very, very dumb declarative language with no functions or control structures - only data. >As soon as you need loops, conditionals, subroutines -- which are all very common when writing tests I already have loops and conditionals via jinja2 (a templating language I did not create) on the high level and in python on the step level. I am not and will never implementing any control structures in YAML (a la ant). The YAML will always remain dumb to help maintain a strict separation of concerns and test readability. >you're making up your own language with horrible warts. Warts such as what?

zobzu 11y ago

not sure how yaml is easier than json also not sure how yaml is easier than python or what not

lnkmails 11y ago
StackStorm developer here! Just to clarify, YAML is one way to write the workflow spec. Just like how YAML is way to write docker compose file. We picked YAML over JSON because it is less verbose and allows one to add comments which is pretty useful if someone is looking at a remediation workflow early in the AM. We do use YAQL expressions for some variable manipulation but that is not a YAML spec. A workflow is a collection of actions and actions can be written in almost any language (as a script) or python (first class actions). So you can think YAML workflow as a declarative spec rather than a programming language. Maybe that helps?