+1. I don't think the pathological cases of YAML syntax are of any concern in this context. Plus it has excellent tooling support, unlike TOML. 07.05.2016, 09:25, Fred Drake kirjoitti:
On May 6, 2016, at 10:59 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
Here's that one-stop writeup/comparison of all the major configuration languages that I mentioned:
https://gist.github.com/njsmith/78f68204c5d969f8c8bc645ef77d4a8f Thank you for this! A very nice summary.
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
While I personally prefer YAML to any of the options on a purely syntax based level, when you weigh in all the other considerations for this I think that it makes sense to go with TOML for it. I expect either YAML or TOML would be acceptable, based on this. I'll admit that I'd not heard of TOML before, but it warrants consideration (possibly for some of my projects as well).
I've spent a fair bit of time using YAML with Ansible lately, as well as some time looking at RAML, and don't find myself worried about the syntax. Every oddness I've run across has been handled with an error when the content couldn't be parsed correctly, rather than unexpected behavior resulting from misunderstanding how it would be parsed. It's entirely possible I just haven't run across the particular problems Donald has run across, though.
(The embedded Jinja2 in Ansible playbooks is another matter; let's not make that mistake.)
-Fred