139
TOML (lemmy.world)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/43529621

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

INI can be nicer for non-techies due to its flat structure. However, TOML seems to be in an awkward spot: either I want flat approachable (I'll pick INI) or not (I'll pick JSONC). Why would I want a mix?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Well, you can still decide how much of the TOML features you actually use in your specific application. For example, I'm currently involved in two projects at $DAYJOB where we read TOML configurations and we don't make use of the inline tables that OP memes about in either of them.

    Ultimately, the big advantage of TOML over INI is that it standardizes all kinds of small INI extensions that folks have come up with over the decades. As such, it has a formal specification and in particular only one specification.
    You can assume that you can read the same TOML file from two different programming languages, which you cannot just assume for INI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (2 children)

    I can't really decide what extensions my users will face, once they are supported. Therefore too many extensions seems bad to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    We just document that this is how you write the config file:

    [network]
bind.host = "127.0.0.1"
bind.port = 1234

# etc.

    And that seems straightforward enough. Yeah, technically users can opt to use inline tables or raw strings or whatever, but they don't have to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •