I've also had trouble with syck throwing errors on sf1.0 apps. After some debugging, I found that the syntax of some of my yml files was slightly incorrect, though the sf1.0 yml parser handled the yml files just fine. So the symfony yml parser seems to be more forgiving than syck.
I'm not really qualified to vote on removal, so I'll leave that to the rest of you guys :P On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 2:34 AM, Ian P. Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Fabien POTENCIER wrote: > > Do we really need syck support in symfony 1.1 as we now have a better > > support for YAML parsing out of the box. All .yml files are cached, so > > it really does not give any performance improvement in production. What > > do you think? > > > > Personally, I'm up for removing support for it - I didn't realise a > co-worker had it installed on my system. Having said this, I appreciate > that my dev platform is pretty beefy, and perhaps some people on > laptops/etc would notice a tiny speed improvement. > > Is there anyone here on a lower end dev system that can quantify the > difference between sf1.1's new and improved YAML parser, and the syck > module? > > > On a similar note, this isn't the first time that I've been 'bitten' by > syck interpretting a .yml differently then sf1.1 - unless the sf1.1 > parser and syck preform identically (which, in theory they should, YAML > has a detailed spec) then supporting both is a bad idea. I am totally > at fault for not writing a test case for this, so I appologies to everyone. > > Consider me a +1 for removal > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" 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/symfony-devs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
