Before we implement SDL package format for DUB

[Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d]

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> Therefore, I think the main critera we should be looking at here, for any
> of the possibilities, isn't "Does this language have flaws?" but rather "Is
> this language *good enough* to be supported by DUB as a JSON alternative?"
>


The 'alternative' bit is the kicker.  Personally, I don't believe DUB can
succeed at having multiple supported config languages - one or the other
will win out over time, and users will diverge.  So no language would meet
that bar (in my opinion).

Mostly we are talking about JSON+stuff as an additional language... so can
it be reframed as 'additional features you can use in your dub config file,
that aren't strict JSON'?

Framing things this way, you could (for example) switch DUB entirely over
to ASON, and avoid the 'switching to a new language' arguments.  DUB takes
JSON, DUB also accepts not-strictly-JSON syntax like comments, etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20140827/5b3ecf89/attachment.html>