3 ms·
Every time I see a yet next inventor designs its own configuration language and foolhardily crosses a rake field of syntax conflicts, design errors, and subtle
by Netch 3y ago
Every time I see a yet next inventor designs its own configuration language and foolhardily crosses a rake field of syntax conflicts, design errors, and subtle logic bugs, I recall LISP with its S-expressions. The two last cases were CMake and BitBake.
Being a kind of divergent multiverse base is not bad, provided a common spirit is still shared and abidden between implementations. For LISP, having e.g. Scheme and Guile as a minimal working base, and Common LISP as an "all batteries included", it not that bad even despite their miscompatibility.