Why do so many tools have JSON config files? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#31

Post by LambdaComplex » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:11 PM UTC

Y-bar wrote: post #29

spottedmarley wrote: post #28

JSON just works, everywhere, all the time. Sometimes I'll use SQLite if there is a particular need.

Can you show an example of how you use SQLite for _config_ files?

I think your emphasis might be in the wrong place...SQLite for config makes enough sense, but as a config _file_?

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#32

Post by JSONrocks » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:12 PM UTC

[dead]

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#33

Post by jamesponddotco » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:12 PM UTC

I don't know about others, but I use JSON because it's in the standard Go library, and most of the times, I rather use something weird than add a dependency.

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#34

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:14 PM UTC

LambdaComplex wrote: post #31

Y-bar wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you show an example of how you use SQLite for _config_ files?

I think your emphasis might be in the wrong place...SQLite for config makes enough sense, but as a config _file_?

[deleted]

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#35

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:14 PM UTC

szatkus wrote: post #23

> A lot of tech folks resist documentation because they think it provides them with job security. No, we're just lazy.

[deleted]

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#36

Post by Y-bar » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:18 PM UTC

LambdaComplex wrote: post #31

Y-bar wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you show an example of how you use SQLite for _config_ files?

I think your emphasis might be in the wrong place...SQLite for config makes enough sense, but as a config _file_?

Not entirely. Because where would I configure the location of the SQLite location/connection then?

Given what I know about it (single file, no auth, and such by default) I sort of understand the ”file” part I think. But not the ”config” part.

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#37

Post by jjice » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:20 PM UTC

szatkus wrote: post #23

> A lot of tech folks resist documentation because they think it provides them with job security. No, we're just lazy.

Occam's Razor at it's finest. I'm not trying to screw others over. I just want to not write sometimes.

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#38

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:20 PM UTC

herbst wrote: post #30

binsquare wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's readable, it's easy, it gets the job done. I don't think that's necessarily lazy, it's just efficient

> It's readable, it's easy That's what I am saying about my ruby codes as well. Still my boss wanted proper commit messages

[deleted]

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#39

Post by mholt » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:21 PM UTC

For Caddy we chose JSON because it's fairly universal, maps nearly 1:1 with Go structs (useful for initializing an extensible server), and nearly everything else compiles to JSON one way or another, so you can choose your own config format, really: https://caddyserver.com/docs/config-adapters

Re: Why do so many tools have JSON config files?

#40

Post by climate_denier_ » Wed, Sep 02, 2026, 7:21 PM UTC

I wish everyone would embrace Amazon's Ion format. Of the data serialization formats it seems the most reasonable with the exception that it can encode S-expressions (so like having data serialization within your data serialization), so it is a bit excessive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_(serialization_format)