dud: A dub replacement

[GoaLitiuM]

On Saturday, 23 November 2019 at 03:57:02 UTC, rikki cattermole 
wrote:
> On 23/11/2019 4:37 AM, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
>> On Monday, 18 November 2019 at 16:54:21 UTC, JN wrote:
>>>> Personally I only ever use SDL with Dub. Even contemplating 
>>>> using JSON for human written configuration files is, for me, 
>>>> totally the wrong thing to do.
>>>
>>> I only use the JSON format. JSON is widespread together with 
>>> XML. SDL I heard first time of in the context of Dub and 
>>> never seen it used elsewhere. TOML also I know only from 
>>> Cargo. YAML at least I know from several different projects.
>>>
>>> I guess the tool must be working very well though if the main 
>>> argument is what kind of data format to use :)
>> 
>> I also only ever use JSON. When SDL was introduced, it was 
>> promised "JSON will never be deprecated". And here people are 
>> wanting to deprecate JSON as if SDL parsers were all that 
>> numerous.
>> 
>> JSON is the answer, SDL is the failed experiment that just 
>> bring disagreement :)
>> 
>> We DO parse dub.json a lot. I suspect any D organization 
>> probably does because dub describe is slow.
>> 
>> I don't care how "inhuman" a 20-line file is.
>
> +1
+1, and JSON as a main format would make sense too because 
querying information from DUB registry is already being done in 
JSON, so throwing in SDL would complicate things.

There's also plenty of JSON parsers out there, some of them being 
extremely performant (like fast.json and asdf), but only one 
(AFAIK) SDL parser with no ideas how fast it is. The performance 
should not be ignored as every build operation requires parsing 
all of the dependencies and their dependencies too which can 
quickly accumulate with larger complicated projects.

The easy of modifying SDL vs JSON is a non-issue for me, you 
don't spend that much time editing the configuration files while 
developing your project.