[Catalyst] YAML vs. *

[A. Pagaltzis]

* Kiki <kiki at bsdro.org> [2006-06-11 12:50]:
> John Napiorkowski wrote:
> >I'm getting this feeling this debate is winding down with the
> >end of the weekend, but just some last two cents; I would
> >seriously prefer anything that is not reliant on spaces, tabs
> >or other semi-invisible characters for syntax purposes.  
> Well it's either that or tag clutter à la XML ... or a
> JSON/Data::Dumper-like format which nobody seems to like as
> far. It's true, whitespace can be a PITA if you're not aware of
> it being significant. OTOH, verbose syntax elements can also be
> annoying, both when reading and when writing (well, there's
> autocompletion, true)

I like JSON… just not for configuration files.

And Apache-style config has verbose elements, but they’re only
for sections… and if you have a lot of tiny sections, you’re
doing something wrong anyway. Look at your `httpd.conf`: lots of
minimal-noise config directives, interspersed with an occasional
open/close tag every 20 or 30 lines or so on average. The virtual
host section is denser than the rest, but IMO still excellently
readable. And it’s very easy to figure out what goes where just
by looking at the format; no manual or cheat sheet necessary.

> Well, the "perl way" would be Data::Dumper + eval in a Safe
> compartment. It's indent insensitive, doesn't look like XML
> (which is my pet peeve regarding C::G) and instantly
> readable/writable if you know Perl.

Suffers from the same problems as JSON and YAML: hard to write
for non-programmers. Also hard to read, like JSON.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>