Draft PEP on RSON configuration file format

[Patrick Maupin]

On Mar 2, 9:20 pm, Erik Max Francis <m... at alcyone.com> wrote:
> Patrick Maupin wrote:
> > On Mar 2, 5:36 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st... at REMOVE-THIS-
> > cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> >> You seem to be taking the position that if you start with a config file
> >> config.json, it is "too hard to edit", but then by renaming it to
> >> config.rson it magically becomes easier to edit. That *is* ludicrous.
>
> > No, but that seems to be the position you keep trying to ascribe to
> > me: "Wait a minute... if JSON is too hard to edit, and RSON is a
> > *superset* of JSON, that means by definition every JSON file is also a
> > valid RSON file.  Since JSON is too hard to manually edit, so is
> > RSON."
>
> Huh?  That's the argument being used against you, not the argument being
> ascribed to you.  You're getting confused about something, somewhere.
>
> --
> Erik Max Francis && m... at alcyone.com &&http://www.alcyone.com/max/
>   San Jose, CA, USA && 37 18 N 121 57 W && AIM/Y!M/Skype erikmaxfrancis
>    I wonder if heaven got a ghetto
>     -- Tupac Shakur

Yes, it is very confusing.  Steven used that purported argument
against me, and then since I disagreed with it, it apparently meant
that I was arguing that changing the file extension type (which I've
never even proposed or discussed, btw) from json to rson somehow
magically makes a preexisting file all better.  I have a headache now,
and it will only get worse, so that's really all I have left to say
about this issue.

Best regards,
Pat