10.05.2016, 18:00, Antoine Pitrou kirjoitti:
I think TOML is more usable than ConfigParser and in particular I think that the adhoc post processing step makes ConfigParser inherently less usable because it forces a special syntax that is specific to this one file. It also means that there's no "right" answer for when you have two different implementations that interpret the same file differently. That's true. OTOH, the question is how much better it is for users
On Tue, 10 May 2016 10:55:38 -0400 Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote: that it's worthwhile bothering them with a syntax change that will require (at one point or another) migrating existing files. TOML doesn't seem that compelling to me in that regard (quite less than YAML, and I'm not a YAML fan).
(as an aside, if there's the question of forking an existing parser implementation for better vendorability, forking a YAML parser may be more useful to third-party folks than forking a TOML parser :-)) Amen to that, and that's exactly what I'd like to do. What should the parser be capable of to be accepted for this task? What are the requirements? Regards
Antoine. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig