Alex,
We just say
config = require('./config.js')
where config.js exports a plain old javascript object.
I think this solves both beefs you have with json: comments and trailing
commas.
Admittedly this approach suffers the keyword problem: if you name any of
your config keys javascript reserved words you may die a puzzling death.
By convention we don't do that.
Perhaps yaml is more elegant and powerful, but exporting plain old
javascript objects for config works fine for us.
Regards,
-George
On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 4:37:22 AM UTC-8, Alex Kocharin wrote:
>
>
> 05.02.2014, 15:47, "zladuric" <[email protected] <javascript:>>:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, February 4, 2014 2:43:25 PM UTC+1, Alex Kocharin wrote:
>
>
> 04.02.2014, 17:01, "Oleg Slobodskoi" <[email protected]>:
>
> Am 04.02.2014 um 13:46 schrieb Alex Kocharin <[email protected]>:
>
> 1. Why JSON? This format was created for data serialization, and isn't
> suited for maintaining by humans.
>
> We could support cjson (https://github.com/kof/node-cjson) or yml ... but
> I am not sure that json is an issue here. I personally had never a need to
> use something more expressive in this case, but I am open for it.
>
> YAML of course. It's the most sensible general purpose format used for
> config files (unless your tool is able to change that config on the fly in
> which case the issue starts to be complicated).
>
>
>
> Out of curiosity, where can one get informed on these things?
>
> Personally, I prefer json over yml. That way I never leave JavaScript way
> of thinking and encapsulating things. But I don't do all that much
> configuration, it's generally customizing pregenerated config files. I
> rarely produce packages, I mostly consume them.
>
>
> If you prefer json over yaml syntax, switch to json5 instead. It solves
> most of the json issues, keeping common syntax the same. I didn't mention
> that because it's not yet a standard, but I hope it'll be soon.
>
> For config files there are exactly two issues with json:
>
> 1. doesn't support comments
> 2. doesn't support trailing commas
>
> Here are a few examples I started to collect recently, you can see for
> yourself:
>
> https://github.com/rlidwka/yapm/blob/master/changes/package-yaml.md#a-few-examples-why-you-should-not-use-packagejson
>
> Apart from comments, there are quite a few quirks there. Did you know that
> JSON is not a subset of javascript? It creates a handful of issues as well.
> I love it how \t, \b and other escape characters are supported, but \v
> don't. And as everyone knows already, JSON isn't extendible and doesn't
> support dates. Remember escaping "\/" and that history of how ASP packed
> Dates? That was funny indeed.
>
> There are good parts in there too. For example, LDJSON is generally a very
> good idea, and used wisely.
>
> YAML has its share of issues of course. It doesn't support tabs for
> indentation (pretty stupid decision imho), has no block comments, and it's
> hard to update it from an application without changing it's formatting.
>
> There is no ideal data format you know. Each one of them is used for
> different things. JSON is good for what it does (it's client-server data
> exchange). But unfortunately it's too easy to use (how do you like that you
> can do require('./something.json'), but require('./something.yaml') is
> officially deprecated?), so people misuse it quite widely. :(
>
>
>
>
>
--
--
Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
Posting guidelines:
https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"nodejs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
