On Wednesday, 2 December 2015 at 16:15:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 11/25/2015 06:53 AM, Suliman wrote:
I find the SDLang format much cleaner to use than JSON
But it's dead format! Nobody do not use it. JSON easy to read,
there is
a lot of it's checkers and formating tools.
Yes, it's not perfect, but now it's _standard_. Personally I'd
prefer
yaml, because it's much easier to read for humans.
But what we will do with SDL? Who know how to parse, validate
it with D,
and with another language? Even ini is better, because
everybody know it.
This whole debate is completely moronic.
1. With DUB, which format is "default" means next to nothing.
2. I don't know where in the world you've gotten the idea you
can no longer just copy-paste deps. That's patently BS.
3. SDLang is fucking trivial. Any programmer worth at least
half their salt (ie anyone here, including you) could've
learned it in same time you've already spent bellyaching about
it.
4. Fuck "standard/popular/common". Seriously, fuck it. That
sort of bullshit nonsense attitude is EXACTLY why half our
industry is as completely fucked as it is with complete and
total shit like PHP, JS, Node, JVM, Angular, JS Toolkit
#five-billion-and-one, gaudy metro colors, meaningless
hieroglyphs, walled gardens, web pages with near-zero content
just empty space and screen-sized images with a quick slogan or
two, text entry boxes that are *literally* slower than a
goddamn Apple II, etc, etc etc... Seriously, enough of this
goddamn "fashion before engineering" bullshit. That load of
crap is why I'm right on the verge of completely jumping ship
from what's left of this goddamn industry. If we start pulling
that shit as a matter of course here too, I'm fucking gone,
good riddance.
The issue is not with humans reading and writing SDLang files -
like you said, the syntax is not hard, and besides - the default
should be enough for most of the basic learning projects one can
make, so by the time you actually need to edit dub.sdl you should
know enough D to not be learning two things at once.
No - the problem is with making tools(IDEs/editor
plugins/scripts) parse and emit it. Yes, computers can read&write
SDLang files - but you need to find a library(or write one
yourself) that fits your language of choice.
I, for example, have a Ruby script that creates small DUB
projects for me when I want to test stuff. Since usually I want
to interact with small parts of the huge application, I need to
do some specific configuration on the DUB project file so I have
my Ruby script load it with it's JSON module, perform the
necessary changes, and save over the original file.
Back then, when DUB moved to SDLang, obviously my script crashed
because `dub init` now creates SDLang config files by default.
This can be changed, but I thought I would go with the flow and
modify my script to edit the SDLang file. I'm always eager to
test new technologies(not adapt - test. I want to experience them
before I decide whether to adapt them or not).
So, the first step was to google for a Ruby Gem that deals with
SDLang. Should be easy, right? Wrong! Neither "Ruby SDL" nor
"Ruby SDLang" yielded any relevant results(at least not in the
first pages of google), and only recently, when this thread
started and I decided to attempt again, I figured out you need to
search for "Ruby Simple Declarative Language". Or to use
rubygems.org's search engine. But that doesn't matter - back then
I couldn't find it so instead just set my script to run `dub
init` with `--format=json`, and now I no longer feel motivated to
convert my script to use SDLang...
If you try to push a new technology, and when people complain
about problems of that technology your reply is that they can
simply use the better alternative instead - well, if you think
this is good for the ecosystem let me tell you about a project
called Tango...
