dholth at gmail.com
Mon Oct 27 21:45:12 CET 2014
I liked it because I agree with the TOML author that the YAML spec
gives rage; YAML seems to be defined as a bunch of things that the end
user is supposed to think are intuitive, but try understanding and
correctly parsing the full set of what is allowed... TOML on the other
hand is short.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 October 2014 19:23, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:
>> Ugh, I hate TOML. I’m -1 on any of the standards using it, but I also
>> think the standards should be around data exchange and should just use
>> JSON and leave front end stuff like that up to the implementations.
> I had a quick glance at TOML, and I can't say I was particularly
> enamoured by it. I don't see that it has any particularly huge
> benefits over "plain" ini files (if your needs are simple) or YAML
> (ignoring the over-complicated stuff that nobody actually needs).
> +1 on JSON for "internal" format, and tools deciding for themselves on
> the best user-facing format.
> I'm also not sure I see the value of mapping directly to a dict.
> Surely internal formats should be isolated from the user interface,
> not exposed directly?
More information about the Distutils-SIG