3 ms·
To be honest, I feel like setup.cfg hasn’t been given a chance to prove itself useful. Just as it was made possible to use setup.cfg only (without setup.py), it
by andrewshadura 4y ago
To be honest, I feel like setup.cfg hasn’t been given a chance to prove itself useful. Just as it was made possible to use setup.cfg only (without setup.py), it’s been almost immediately taken over by pyproject.toml. However, for those who actually migrated their projects to setup.cfg, migrating once again doesn’t bring that many benefits (but e.g. loses compat with flake8).
Besides, setup.cfg’s syntax is slightly more elegant, or at least I think so :)
By the way, why do you think it is more capable? As far as I know, setup.cfg has some feature toml (intentionally) doesn’t support (not that they’re useful in this context anyway).
- danpalmer 4y agoI've always thought of TOML as not far off a superset of the configparser format, although with a different API in code. I realise most tools don't use the extent of configparser, but coming from JSON and YAML, I always found the more advanced configparser features counter-intuitive and awkward to use. I'm not a huge fan of TOML, but it has the necessary primitive values (strings, numbers, booleans), and some reasonable structures for managing collections and nesting.