• Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    How does one address the paradox that, as JSON itself is evil, one cannot use it for evil?

    (opinions may vary on the above; but it’s mine, so nyah nyah.)

      • tinkling4938@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 hours ago

        YAML is (mostly) a superset of JSON. Is the face hugger any less evil than the alien bursting out of your chest?

        • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 hours ago

          It’s got enough serious flaws and quirks that I can feel smug hating on it. JSON is far from perfect, but overall it’s the least worst of human-readable formats.

          Only Python manages to get away with syntactical indentation.

          • renzev@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 hours ago

            The complaints about yaml’s quirks (no evaluating to false, implicit strings, weird number formats, etc.) are valid in theory but I’ve never encountered them causing any real-life issues.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        XML is ok for complex docs where you have a detailed structure and relationships. JSON is good for simple objects. YAML is good for being something to switch to for the illusion of progress.

        • Radioactive Butthole@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Meh. I just wish XML was easier to parse. I have to shuttle a lot of XML data back and forth. As far as I can tell, the only way to query the data is to download a whole engine to run a special query language, and that doesn’t really integrate into any of my workflows. JSON retains the hierarchy and is trivially parsed in almost any programming language. I bet a JSON file containing the exact same data would be much smaller also, since you don’t list each tag twice.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        It’s still using the lesser of 3 evils, we need a fourth structural markup language.