Before we implement SDL package format for DUB

[Sönke Ludwig via Digitalmars-d]

Am 27.08.2014 10:02, schrieb Kagamin:
> On Wednesday, 27 August 2014 at 02:24:46 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> That's somewhat misleading.
>>
>> More accurately, SDL is newline-delimited (with backslash line
>> continuation). That's pretty darn simple and has an age-old history.
>> It's not like we're talking weird Python/JavaScript rules or anything
>> here.
>>
>> The only thing that does trip people up is that the existence of { and
>> } in the syntax makes people think "C-family and therefore freeform".
>> And then it isn't, so that makes them angry. "Yeeargh! Hulk Not Want!"
>> Well...or something vaguely sorta kinda like that ;)
>
> That's justified, because SDL fails to not surprise. Curly brace
> syntaxes are not line-delimited not requires backslash line continuations.

Like JavaScript for example?

>
>>>> - XML is XML. I find it actually OK.
>>>
>>> I would support this. Yes, is verbose, we know that. But is a very solid
>>> foundation.
>>>
>>
>> XML is the spawn of satan. And not the cool "rock n roll", "heavy
>> metal" kind of satan, or the bumbling lovable DBZ "Mr. 'Hercule'
>> Satan" either, but the "hey, let's write a commercial webserver in
>> shell scripts" kind of raw pulsating evil.
>
> What's wrong with XML? I work with it daily and see no problem. The less
> syntax a language has, the worse it scales, and if it doesn't scale, its
> adoption creates a technical debt. 100 lines with 3 levels of nesting
> and JSON becomes hard to follow and TOML becomes simply unmanageable.

The reason to search for an additional format is to make it more 
convenient and readable for human interaction. XML wouldn't structurally 
a bad choice, but is awful because of it's syntactical overhead.