3 ms·
Here I am still using INI and/or XML configs like it's 2000. Programs can read/write if needed, comments, parsers galore. I still can't see how these are "broke
by edoceo 8y ago
Here I am still using INI and/or XML configs like it's 2000. Programs can read/write if needed, comments, parsers galore. I still can't see how these are "broken". My biggest driver is the comments issue - nearly all non-json config files (ini, XML, rc, conf) for projects I use have loads of valuable instructions in them, right next to the thing that needs that documentation. Currently, all JSON ones I observe are missing that
- ChrisSD 8y agoTOML is the popular modern alternative to INI. It's a more rigorous spec and has a few useful extensions.
- edoceo 8y agoYea, yeah...I see TOML and YAML a lot too - I also prefer those to JSON for config files. I've been rocking the ini file config for 25+ years, it just works, zaro bugs, and I can get on with building cool stuff.
- ChrisSD 8y agoYAML I think is too full featured. It does way too much for a config file format. INI and TOML have the advantage of being simple and focused. My only issue with INI is that different parsers aren't always entirely compatible with one another. But that's mostly only a problem for edge cases.
- h1d 8y agoLucky your parsers have been behaving as you expect when the format isn't even standardized. You can keep building "cool" stuff with a bit more solid format as well.