I hate new DUB config format

Poyeyo via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sun Nov 29 09:25:02 PST 2015

On Sunday, 29 November 2015 at 16:07:05 UTC, UserAbcabc123 wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 November 2015 at 06:03:21 UTC, Poyeyo wrote:
>> On Saturday, 28 November 2015 at 23:38:35 UTC, UserAbcabc123 
>> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 28 November 2015 at 22:00:32 UTC, Poyeyo wrote:
>>>> Dubconf seems to me a good replacement name for the format.
>>> Hilarous, I guess you didn't read the topic at all...
>> I've read it all. But I'm not joining the group in arguing 
>> against the format. And yes, someone said .dubconf should be 
>> an analog for.
> DUB people can't change the format name. They are not the SDL 
> authors.

Of course they can, it's called a fork. It's even logical to 
change the name if they choose to add features to it. Examples of 
forks: Iceweasel and Pale Moon are forks of Firefox.

> This is what I find hilarous because let's say 12 pages before 
> there's been a misunderstanding caused by the fact that some 
> people thought the format is propietary, thus DUB people have 
> have been unfairly blamed...
> The whole discussion is not about the file extention. The File 
> extention is not a problem at all, the discussion was more 
> about the format itself.

Well, I'm not the only one to mention that the only really bad 
thing about sdlang is the name.

Let's go back to a general point of view.

As far as dependency managers go, the language used varies 

C/C++ make/cmake/nmake -> here be dragons
perl CPANfile -> something perly
java maven -> xml
ruby gemfile -> ruby
python pip -> python egg
php composer -> json
node.js npm -> json
go godep -> json
rust cargo -> rust manifest
d dub -> json and sdlang

Looking at the two main D competitors, go uses json and rust uses 
a proprietary format.

Both languages seem to be used without issues in each project, 
may be the only issue for dub is supporting two formats instead 
of one.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list