On Thu, 01 May 2008 23:03:38 +0200, Torsten Bronger wrote: > Hallöchen! > > Ivan Illarionov writes: > >> [...] >> >> I took the example from >> http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/10/29/14225/062 I haven't use my own >> example only because I don't have one at hand right now. YAML, in its >> simple form, definetely makes me more productive. I wasted too much >> time with XML in the past and I won't ever use it as a serialization or >> config/settings format again. .INI/ConfigParser is too limited and has >> no standards. I just don't see anything better than YAML to do human >> and Python editable config files and to serialize information for later >> use. > > Okay, but serialisation is something completely different. Nobody would > use INI files for it. > > For other things, it simply depends on the use case. For example, I > *know* that the configuration files of my pet project will not exceed > the dumb section.key=value scheme so anything else would be overkill. > > Besides, YAML adds another dependency. > > Tschö, > Torsten.
For me it looks more like an old-school/new-school thing than use-case thing. I may be wrong, but I see more and more new projects use things like reST and YAML/JSON and it feels like they are gradually replacing traditional old-school solutions. And I've got very strong impression that YAML is a the future of configuration files when Google released their App Engine. Of course I may be wrong and it's just my opinion. -- Ivan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
