What a delightfully arrogant article, to the point I believe it to be satire (stopped reading at section headers, perhaps I missed the punchline). TOML is by f

What a delightfully arrogant article, to the point I believe it to be satire (stopped reading at section headers, perhaps I missed the punchline). TOML is by far the most stripped down and easy to understand configuration format I've ever used, allowing just enough syntactic sugar to be useful without changing semantics. The fact it's made by Tom is meaningless, so its flagrant dismissal is silly to me. Meanwhile, the proposed configuration format sounds like a nightmare to read. There is still clashing syntax, offloads all of the parsing work to the software (which means now you have the same config format with multiple different ways of interpreting values), restricts usage of certain characters with no way of escaping them (someone else mentioned base64), and otherwise requires that you recursively parse it for nested KVs rather than constructing the final in memory structures in a linear pass, adding a layer of indirection prior to parsing. Not to mention, I really get turned off by this sort of pious writing style. No thanks. Lots of reasons to dislike config formats we've seen before but this doesn't solve anything in my eyes.