20 Dec
2014
20 Dec
'14
10:43 a.m.
On 2014-12-20 10:10, Jochen Kunz wrote:
Am 19.12.14 20:37, schrieb Chuck Guzis:
JSON is not really that human readable, and even less human editable.
That said - what are people trying to achieve. If someone can explain
that a bit, maybe I can also join the fun of this argument... :-)
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
A human-readable ultra lightweight markup
language is my choice.
This requirement sounds pretty much like a call for JSON.
Simple,
extensible, easy to read and write for humans and machines.
JSON does require a parser of some sort, so
perhaps not a good choice.
?????
Anything requires a parser of some sort. Even something "simple" as a
"keyword=value" format will require a parser. If you roll your own
format you are doomed to reinvent the parser wheel. If you use JSON you
can use one of the various JSON implementations out there. (For C I
recommend Jansson and for C++ jsoncpp.)
Chuck, I have been in this hell at work. We didn't settle for a well
defined format early. We reinvented the wheel. This led to all sorts of
inconsistencies and ambiguities. At the moment we are in the painful
process of refactoring everything to migrate to JSON...
Also keep in mind that JSON is a well defined standard, ECMA-404, and
many people already know JSON.