11–20 of 167 posts
If the authors would like to discuss how Tree Notation may be a better syntax for this language, please feel free to get in touch: breck7@gmail.com or yunits@hawaii.edu.
Here is a demonstration of what a Tree Language for config files could look like: https://treenotation.org/designer/#standard%20config
Seems like an interesting language, but I'm very disappointed that my first attempt to view example code took 5 clicks. The most important part of any programming language website is a short example snippet: put it above the fold on the front page!
Seems really interesting after a quick read-through. Specs that allow range-based validation look useful, and the structural declarations also feel like they'll help reduce a lot of boilerplate and repetition. I wonder how this compares with Dhall and Jsonnet, both of which I've been looking into as a safer alternative to templated YAML. With Google putting its weight behind this I'm curious if it'll start finding it…
I used the following command on the cloned repository to find it[1]:
find . -iname '*.cue' | xargs ls -l | tr -s ' ' | cut -d ' ' -f5,9 | sort -n
The tl;dr is buried deep in the docs > CUE is an extension of JSON. This improves familiarity and makes it easy to get going quickly. > In its simplest use case, CUE can substitute for a more pleasant way to write JSON.
So it’s a google branded yaml? Let’s raise a glass to our blue eyed comrades who’ll adopt this fully, only for google to decide in 2-3 years to completely and aggressively kill it again for no apparent reason.
Any named examples? I’m sure there are-and likely they just elude me at present, maybe seeing their names will jog the memory probably?
my time at Google has made me hate GCL so much.
Is it true that there are dozens of internal language and DSLs? Why does G have so many?