Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 173 posts

Re: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

#61

Post by cjh_ »

nightpool wrote: post #36
LeafStorm wrote: post #3

I note that, like many erstwhile specs, TOML does not document the escape sequences accepted in strings. Nor does it exhaustively specify integer formats and float formats - rather ironic for a spec that advertises "TOML is designed to be unambiguous and as simple as possible." The limitation on array types seemed fairly arbitrary at first glance, but after thinking it over I realized it aided compatibility with lang…

I don't know if you can call him "arrogant". None of it read as very serious to me, I more assumed he was just having fun.

fwiw: This is how I read it too, I didn't get any sense of arrogance.

Re: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

#64

Post by dfkf »

jaequery wrote: post #62
dfkf wrote: post #53

And how is this better than xml?

please let's not bring XML into this. last thing we need is someone inspired to say let's all go back to XML.

Go "back"?! There are lots of places where xml is alive and well and config files is one of them. And you can see why - empty elements with attributes look rather concise, and without all that punctuation noise JSON has.

Re: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

#65

Post by jemeshsu »

About the use of mark up language as config file. I see that in most Python apps, the config file is just another Python script and not using another markup language. This way makes sence in a dynamic language and it feels natural. I understand it is a habit to use yaml in Ruby apps for config. Is it not possible to just use Ruby script as config file since the script can be loaded dynamically? What are the pros and cons of using another markup language as config file vs using just the app language(Python/Ruby)?

Re: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

#67

Post by zwily »

niggler wrote: post #45
kingkilr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In JSON that datetime won't deserialize to a datetime instance in your language in a conforming parser. Further JSON has no comments (this is a killer for a configuration format).

There are ways to fake comments by using extra fields: { "what i want": "what i really really want", "ಠ_ಠ":"Ignore the eyes" }

I think you just helped Tom make his argument... :)

Re: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

#68

Post by mccolin »

jemeshsu wrote: post #65

About the use of mark up language as config file. I see that in most Python apps, the config file is just another Python script and not using another markup language. This way makes sence in a dynamic language and it feels natural. I understand it is a habit to use yaml in Ruby apps for config. Is it not possible to just use Ruby script as config file since the script can be loaded dynamically? What are the pros and…

It is also common for ruby configs to be script files. Rails, for instance, has the config/initializers folder which is a set of ruby scripts that will be run at startup. It comes down mostly to preference.

Re: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

#69

Post by agscala »

markov_twain wrote: post #14
dkersten wrote: post #9

Urg. Off topic, but I dislike this perl/ruby tendency of calling hash tables hashes . When I see the word hash , I always think of a value (ie a hash code) and not a data structure. Why couldn't they call it a hash map, hash table, map, table, dictionary etc like all the other languages...?

This bit of ruby should take care of it HashMap = HashTable = Map = Table = Dictionary = Hash And if you're feeling adventurous, Object.send :remove_const, :Hash

Please never, ever do this
Post reply on HN