From: Jeff Hostetler Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:31:50 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] routines to generate JSON data Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On 3/17/2018 3:38 AM, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Jeff King wrote: >> 3. Some other similar format. YAML comes to mind. Last time I looked >> (quite a while ago), it seemed insanely complex, but I think you >> could implement only a reasonable subset. OTOH, I think the tools >> ecosystem for parsing JSON (e.g., jq) is much better. >> > > I would personally avoid YAML. It's "easier" for humans to read/parse, > but honestly JSON is already simple enough and anyone who writes C or > javascript can likely parse and hand-write JSON anyways. YAML lacks > built-in parsers for most languages, where as many scripting languages > already have JSON parsing built in, or have more easily attainable > libraries available. In contrast, the YAML libraries are much more > complex and less likely to be available. > > That's just my own experience at $dayjob though. Agreed. I just looked at the spec for it and I think it would be harder for us to be assured we are generating valid output with leading whitespace being significant (without a lot more inspection of the strings being passed down to us). Jeff