Before we implement SDL package format for DUB

[Jonathan Marler via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 25 August 2014 at 19:35:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, 25 August 2014 at 18:31:42 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
>> If only it supported comments...
>
> Yeah, that's what I hate about JSON. It's pretty good overall, 
> but that's a huge deficiency IMHO - and I'd very much like to 
> be able to put comments in my dub package files. So, in that 
> respect, ASON seems like a definite improvement. However, I am 
> a bit wary of creating a new file format. Maybe if it's good 
> enough and marketed well enough, it could challenge JSON, but 
> at the moment, it would just be for dub, which isn't so great.
>
> The fact that it's backwards compatible with JSON would be 
> useful for avoiding breaking existing dub packages, and it does 
> sound like it's a better format, but the fact that it's just 
> been created for this makes me leery. And even if we were to 
> push it beyond dub and try and get it accepted more widely, 
> it's new enough that I question that it won't need to be 
> adjusted after further use, since it's rare that anything 
> complicated is done right the first time.
>
> So, I'm not necessarily against the idea of using ASON, but I'm 
> not sure that it's a good idea either.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Thanks for your reply Jonathan, I would have the same 
reservations as you...I wouldn't want a languages exclusively 
used for DUB.  And you could be right that the language may 
require some modifications since I just wrote it last Saturday.  
On the other hand, new languages have to be introduced some where 
right?  Maybe if DUB started using it...other tools and software 
would look into it?