Show me a better text format for serializing

Comments

• suy@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Norway.

  Ups. Sorry, I meant “NO”.

  source
• magic_lobster_party@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  JSON for serialization all the way. It’s simple and to the point. It does one thing and does it well. There’s little room for annoying surprises. Any JSON can easily be minified and prettified back and forth. If you want it in binary format you can convert it to BSON.

  Yaml is too much of a feature creep. It tries to do way too many things at the same time. There are so many traps to fall into if you’re not cautious enough. The same thing can be written in multitudes of ways.

  source

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yes, but whoever decided that json can’t have trailing commas has my ire.

    { "a": 1,
      "b": 2,  <-- nope
    }
    

    There was some other pitfall I can’t remember around missing keys and undefined, too, but I can’t remember it now.

    source

    • OmnipotentEntity@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Change to Haskell formatted commas and the problem goes away :D

      { "a": 1
      , "b": 2
      , "c":
          [ 3
          , 6
          , 9
          ]
      }
      

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • adambowles@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Trailing commas are supported in json5, as well as comments

      source
    • Sgtmoustache@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’m pretty sure you can have trailing commas…

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • kool_newt@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    There should be a “Simple YAML” that is just scalars, lists, and dicts.

    source

    • kogasa@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Toml

      source
• interolivary@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  There’s a special place in hell for the inventor of semantically significant whitespace

  source

  • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Indenting copy pasted yaml is always a pain in the butt. Any indentation you give is likely a valid yaml. Especially bad when indentation has a significant meaning. You have to double check back and forth to ensure nothing bad has sneaked in.

    With JSON there are no such discrepancies. It’s likely the editor has figured it out for you already. If it hasn’t it’s easy to prettify the JSON yourself.

    source

    • interolivary@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Semantic whitespace problems can easily be literally impossible to solve automatically. One of the dumbest fucking ideas anybody ever came up with in computing and its inventor if anyone belongs in YAML Hell. As a fuckup it’s not quite as bad as null, but that ain’t exactly a high bar

      source
  • synae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Sounds like a good time to me!

    source

    • interolivary@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’m not sure which thought is scarier: that you don’t know what you’re signing up for, or that you do know and you enjoy fixing undecidable formatting fuckups manually

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• calcopiritus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Serializing? For serializing you probably want performance above all else. I’m saying this without checking any benchmark, but I’m sure yaml is more expensive to parse than other formats where indentation don’t have meaning.

  For human readability: it has to be readable (and writeable) by all humans. I know (a lot of people) that dislike yaml, toml and XML. I don’t know of a single person that struggles to read/write json, there is a clear winner.

  source

  • DrM@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    JSON would be perfect if it allowed for comments. But it doesn’t and that alone is enough for me to prefer YAML over JSON. Yes, JSON is understandable without any learning curve, but having a learning curve is not always bad. YAML provides a major benefit that is worth the learning curve and doesn’t have the issues that XML has (which is that there is no way to understand an XML without also having the XSD for it)

    source

    • Michal@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Json should also allow for trailing commas. There’s no reason for it not too. It’s annoying having to maintain commas.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • frezik@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      JSON5 has comments, among a few other shortsighted limitations of the original.

      source
    • kogasa@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If a comment isn’t part of the semantic content of a JSON object it has no business being there. JSON models data, it’s not markup language for writing config files.

      You can use comments in JSON schema (in a standardized way) when they are semantically relevant: json-schema.org/…/comments

      For the data interchange format, comments aren’t part of the JSON grammar but the option to parse non-JSON values is left open to the implementation. Many implementations do detect (and ignore) comments indicated by e.g. # or //.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • kool_newt@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I don’t know of a single person that struggles to read/write json, there is a clear winner.

    Really? Any JSON over 80 chars becomes a nightmare to read for me, especially if indention is not used to make it more readable.

    source
  • Blackmist@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I don’t know why we’re fucking about trying to use text editors to manipulate structured data.

    Yeah, it’s convenient to just be able to use a basic text editor, but we’re not trying to cram it all on a floppy disk here. I’m sure we could have a nice structured data editor somewhere for all those XML, JSON and YAML files we’re supposed to maintain every day.

    source
  • kogasa@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Serializing isn’t necessarily about performance, or we’d just use protobuf or similar. I agree Json is a great all rounder. Combine with JSON object schema to define sophisticated DSLs that are still readable, plain JSON. TOML is nice as a configuration language, but its main appeal (readability) suffers when applied to complex modeling tasks. XML is quite verbose and maybe takes the “custom DSL” idea a little too far. YAML is a mistake.

    source
• NewPerspective@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  My problem with yaml is if you truncate it at any random spot, there’s a high likelihood it’s still valid yaml. I don’t like the idea that things can continue without even knowing there’s a problem. The single opening and closing curly braces enclosing a json object is all it takes to at least know you didn’t receive the entire message. Toml has the same issue. I’ll stick with json when it makes sense.

  source

  • pimeys@lemmy.nauk.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Add a schema to it and you get XML. The ultimate serialization format.

    source

    • marcos@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Quite like YAML, XML has too many stuff in it. While a lot of parsers are not standard compliant and safe, if there’s any chance the stuff you include on your code can evolve into a fully featured parser, including it is something to avoid.

      There is this language called KDL that looks interesting.

      source
• synae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  For serializing? I’d probably just go with json.

  For content meant to be written or edited by humans? YAML all day baby

  source

  • Andy@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Ever tried NestedText? It’s like basic YAML but everything is a string (types are up to the code that ingests it), and you never ever need to escape a character.

    source

    • synae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’ve got too many consumers that I don’t control which dictate their input formats. And to be quite honest, “types are up to the code that ingests it” sounds like a huge negative to me.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• colourlessidea@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  YAML is pretty good for readability, pretty awful for writability

  source

  • synae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Interesting, I find that the other reasonable options are far less writable than yaml

    source
  • NewPerspective@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Rule of thumb: valid json is valid yaml. If you’re ever unsure, do it the old fashioned way.

    source

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I really don’t see how that’s true.

      You’re telling me this is valid yaml?

      { firstName: “Intensely” }

      How is that yaml?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• MagnoliaMayhem@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Json. Your move, Joker.

  source

  • theterrasque@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    puts the json in the yaml parser

    Your move, foolish mortal

    source

    • derpgon@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      For those uninitiated, every JSON is a valid YAML, since YAML is just a superset of JSON.

      source
• nxdefiant@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  If you have a choice to start from scratch, TOML is probably the better option.

  source
• urquell@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  So much json here. All wrong, it’s csv

  source
• Artyom@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Yaml is a great, human-readible file format. Unless there’s an explanation point in it, then it is an illegible Eldrich horror.

  source
• Windex007@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Genuinely curious what features OP is looking for, specifically for serialization as per the post, that has resulted in the conclusion being yaml.

  source
• kool_newt@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Protobuf

  source

  • onlinepersona@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    text?

    source

    • kool_newt@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      What, you can’t read binary? Noob

      lol, ya I guess I didn’t notice that part

      source

      • -> View More Comments