3 ms·

I agree about the double bracket syntax however I don't think that is part of the specification any more, instead nested structures use a dot notation inside si

I agree about the double bracket syntax however I don't think that is part of the specification any more, instead nested structures use a dot notation inside single brackets. Both solutions do still feel like a hack though, but the dot notation is definitely less ugly. That all said, for flatter schema's I do personally think TOML is more readable than it's JSON, YAML and XML counterparts. If there is one thing I did like about Windows back when I used to run it, it was the syntax of INI files (which TOML was heavily influenced by). Ultimately though, there is no perfect solution for all problems.

freyir 8y ago
> for flatter schema's I do personally think TOML is more readable than it's JSON, YAML and XML Yes. But for nested data, I find TOML becomes the least readable and I have to fall back to YAML or JSON. Maybe we need just one more ML...
- deckar01 8y ago
  I disagree. The way JSON and YAML nest data with indentation forces data to be disconnected from it's property chain when there are multiple large items at each level. TOML seems to provide a solution to that by allowing deeply nested paths to be declare explicitly at the top level for each item. You get to choose how to split the paths into containers instead of being locked into a 1-to-1 tree structure.
- notheguyouthink 8y ago
  Oh man, I can't disagree more. I loathe YAML for readability. When I'm 2 pages down on a yaml tree I have no clue how many indents exist before what I'm working on. Likewise, when I scroll up, I quickly lose track of what the actual parent to the data I was working on is. I've found it to be an absolute mess. JSON doesn't even fit for me, because it's not human intended (imo). Being able to document (comments) configuration is a requirement for me on any config language.
unethical_ban 8y ago
https://github.com/toml-lang/toml#array-of-tables https://github.com/toml-lang/toml#array-of-tables Still there FWIW.

freyir 8y ago

> for flatter schema's I do personally think TOML is more readable than it's JSON, YAML and XML Yes. But for nested data, I find TOML becomes the least readable and I have to fall back to YAML or JSON. Maybe we need just one more ML...

deckar01 8y ago
I disagree. The way JSON and YAML nest data with indentation forces data to be disconnected from it's property chain when there are multiple large items at each level. TOML seems to provide a solution to that by allowing deeply nested paths to be declare explicitly at the top level for each item. You get to choose how to split the paths into containers instead of being locked into a 1-to-1 tree structure.
notheguyouthink 8y ago
Oh man, I can't disagree more. I loathe YAML for readability. When I'm 2 pages down on a yaml tree I have no clue how many indents exist before what I'm working on. Likewise, when I scroll up, I quickly lose track of what the actual parent to the data I was working on is. I've found it to be an absolute mess. JSON doesn't even fit for me, because it's not human intended (imo). Being able to document (comments) configuration is a requirement for me on any config language.

unethical_ban 8y ago

https://github.com/toml-lang/toml#array-of-tables https://github.com/toml-lang/toml#array-of-tables Still there FWIW.