On Thursday, 28 August 2014 at 19:47:13 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 8/28/2014 5:29 AM, Kagamin wrote:
and the only way
to make them scale is to turn them into syntactical equivalent
of XML
with closing tags. And even then more verbose than XML itself.
So what's
a difference from XML if good config language still must have
XML syntax?
The differences (off the top of my head, there may be more):
- Nobody has to actually write the closing
- Nobody had to keep the opening/closing in sync
- The closing takes up zero bytes
- Nobody has to actually look at the closing if they want to
reduce the visual clutter: Ie, viewing it is an optional thing.
So it has no advantage over using a grammar-based XML editor,
just less flexible and more clumsy… Sounds like the wrong
trade-off.
(tags don't take much space when the file is compressed)
