www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.learn - Which TOML package, or SDLang?

reply Daren Scot Wilson <darenw darenscotwilson.com> writes:
So, which package do I use for TOML?

I find these three:

* toml-foolery  (Andrej Petrović)
* toml-d, or toml.d (oglu on github) at ver 0.3.0
* toml, (dlang community on github) at ver 2.0.1

I'm guessing from version numbers that the third one, toml, is 
officially good for real world use. But I wonder if there are 
good reasons to use the others.

Also, a low-effort search for TOML in the D world turned up 
SDLang, where the substring "DLang" has nothing to do with dlang, 
the common short name for D Language. SDLang looks nice. Should I 
ditch TOML for it?

I just realized - it's been ages since I've dealt with config 
files, beyond editing them as an end user. I work on existing 
software where someone else made the choiced and wrote the code, 
or it's a small specialized project not needing config. I'm a 
config caveman!

This is for a small fun personal project with potential show-off 
value, available on github but too primitive for now to mention. 
Controlling hardware, needing to store device info to recall for 
later runs. There are zero compatibility or standards issues to 
consider.  Whatever is simplest to implement and tinker with is 
the winner.
Jan 29 2023
next sibling parent Mathias LANG <geod24 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 06:38:46 UTC, Daren Scot Wilson 
wrote:

 So, which package do I use for TOML?

 I find these three:

 * toml-foolery  (Andrej Petrović)
 * toml-d, or toml.d (oglu on github) at ver 0.3.0
 * toml, (dlang community on github) at ver 2.0.1

 I'm guessing from version numbers that the third one, toml, is 
 officially good for real world use. But I wonder if there are 
 good reasons to use the others.


I would go with the dlang-community one, whenever available.


 Also, a low-effort search for TOML in the D world turned up 
 SDLang, where the substring "DLang" has nothing to do with 
 dlang, the common short name for D Language. SDLang looks nice. 
 Should I ditch TOML for it?


I would not recommend it. SDL (Simple Declarative Language) is a 
language we have support for, but it's rather unknown - TOML will 
probably be simpler for end users.


 I just realized - it's been ages since I've dealt with config 
 files, beyond editing them as an end user. I work on existing 
 software where someone else made the choiced and wrote the 
 code, or it's a small specialized project not needing config. 
 I'm a config caveman!

 This is for a small fun personal project with potential 
 show-off value, available on github but too primitive for now 
 to mention. Controlling hardware, needing to store device info 
 to recall for later runs. There are zero compatibility or 
 standards issues to consider.  Whatever is simplest to 
 implement and tinker with is the winner.


If I can allow a shameless self plug, and if you are willing to 
consider YAML:
https://github.com/dlang-community/configy

If you are willing to stick to a "simple" config where you 
essentially want some values to end up in a struct, and want 
decent error messages, this is for you.
Jan 30 2023
prev sibling parent reply Guillaume Piolat <first.last spam.org> writes:
On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 06:38:46 UTC, Daren Scot Wilson 
wrote:

 I just realized - it's been ages since I've dealt with config 
 files, beyond editing them as an end user. I work on existing 
 software where someone else made the choiced and wrote the 
 code, or it's a small specialized project not needing config. 
 I'm a config caveman!


Why not XML? :) It has comments, you can use backslashes too.
Jan 30 2023
parent reply Adam D Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 15:37:56 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
wrote:

 Why not XML? :) It has comments, you can use backslashes too.


no kidding, xml is an underrated format.
Jan 30 2023
parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh qfbox.info> writes:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 03:59:52PM +0000, Adam D Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:

 On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 15:37:56 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:

 Why not XML? :) It has comments, you can use backslashes too.


 
 no kidding, xml is an underrated format.


XML is evil.

Let me qualify that statement.  XML, as specified by the XML spec, is
pure evil.  It has some absolutely nasty corners that has pathological
behaviours like recursive expansion of entities (exploitable for DOS
attacks or to induce OOM crashes in XML parsers), which includes
token-pasting style pathology like C's preprocessor, and remote fetching
of arbitrary network resources (which, no thanks to pathological
entities, can be easily obfuscated).

XML as used by casual users, however, is a not-bad format for markup
text.  It's far too verbose for my tastes, but for some applications it
could be a good fit.  As far as implementation is concerned, a
(non-compliant) XML parser that implements the subset of XML employed
for "normal" use, i.e., without the pathological bits, would be a good
thing, e.g., Jonathan's dxml.  A fully-compliant XML parser that
includes the pathological bits, however, I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot
pole.


T

-- 
Customer support: the art of getting your clients to pay for your own
incompetence.
Jan 30 2023
parent Daren Scot Wilson <darenw darenscotwilson.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 17:54:15 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:


 XML is evil.


Agreed!


I'm going with TOML, community package. It's working, so far.
Jan 30 2023