3 ms·
I think that I agree of you, and I'm obviously fond of clever DSL's cough mgmt config cough, but it's not clear what specifics you had in mind here. Share away
by purpleidea 6y ago
I think that I agree of you, and I'm obviously fond of clever DSL's cough mgmt config cough, but it's not clear what specifics you had in mind here. Share away if you're interested!
- pie_flavor 6y agoIf it was something that looked like YAML, but wasn't, that'd be fine. YAML in its simplest form is a neat idea. Indentation is simple and obvious. Same as it doesn't matter that TOML looks a heck of a lot like INI. But using YAML itself is terrible, because YAML is a colossally bloated language that does crazy things at the wrong points and has a million syntaxes that step on each others' toes.
- ddevault 6y agoYAML has far too many features and doesn't let you structure data well for this use-case. There's no concise way to provide typings for its fields, for instance - note how every field requires two lines in the examples, far too verbose. I don't really know what to tell you other than that YAML is not well-suited to this domain, and designing a domain-specific language which meets the particular needs of the system, and only just, would be better. You could base it off of C structs or Rust types or s-expressions or whatever else, the exact syntax isn't important so long as it allows you to concisely and precisely specify the semantics of the tool.