4 ms·

Still much prefer HJSON (http://hjson.org/ http://hjson.org/) for stuff that people might need to touch. If it's truly for end-users (read: non-admin/dev types

Still much prefer HJSON (http://hjson.org/ http://hjson.org/) for stuff that people might need to touch. If it's truly for end-users (read: non-admin/dev types), you probably shouldn't have them touching configuration files _at all_.

tobr 7y ago
How is this at all related to Dhall? It looks like a completely different thing with a completely different purpose.
- NuSkooler 7y ago
  They are both text based configuration file formats made to be easier for humans to interact with, so I'm not sure what you're confused about?
  - tobr 7y ago
    That’s about the least interesting thing about Dhall. (It’s weird that they tout it prominently on the homepage.) There are so many flavors of syntax sugar for JSON, Dhall is a completely different beast.
    - mcphage 7y ago
      You might want to ask the HN admins to rename the title for this post, then.
      - tobr 7y ago
        It looks fine to me. Reducing repetition is precisely the type of thing Dhall’s features should be useful for.
epage 7y ago
Don't fully remember why I prefer json5 to hjson but at a quick glance, bare values is one. Bare values are ripe for someone entering in a string and accidentally getting a bool or number instead.
ape4 7y ago
Also Relaxed JSON. http://www.relaxedjson.org/ http://www.relaxedjson.org/