From: Oren Ben-K. <or...@ri...> - 2001-07-16 09:13:12
|
Clark C . Evans [mailto:cc...@cl...] wrote: > Or... we could do... > > One: <<T > Imagine this block scalar as being > indented by a tab character. > Two: <<T- > > Leading new line, but not a trailing new line. > > ... > > While we are at it (updating the spec) I'd > like to limit tab(i) production so that it > it is either: > tab(i+1) = tab(i) '\t' > or tab(i+1) = tab(i) ' '+ > > In other words, either a tab, or 1+ spaces, > but not a mixture of tabs and spaces. This > would fit in nicely with the above <<N > mechanism where N in { 1,2,3,... } union { T } I don't know. I agree with Jason that counting characters isn't fun. I think that the '<' indent '>' idea is more friendly - cut&paste of the indent is a friendlier operation for human-edited files. As for each indentation level being ' '+ XOR '\t', I agree it is "good practice" but I don't think it should be enforced in the spec. My problem with the '|' syntax is that it is so, well, *verbose*. And it is actually less human-friendly when editing a file - if you want to paste a chunk of text into your YAML document as a block, you can't just paste & indent it, you need to add these pesky '|' characters to each line. My way you could just paste, indent, and copy the indentation in between the '<' ... '>' pair. This seems like the easiest way you could do it, except of course for the classical Perl way: block: <<ARBITRARY-END-OF-BLOCK block here, not indented ARBITRARY-END-OF-BLOCK I have to admit, it has its charm (simplicity, robustness). True, it isn't indented, but I'm wondering how important that is for a large chunk of pre-formatted text (e.g., code) with reasonably long lines. Especially when this text is given as a value to a key which isn't at the top level: map: % key: % sub-key: % sub-sub-key: |Long line here - more readable? as-opposed-to: <<BLOCK Long line here - less readable? BLOCK I'm having second thoughts... Have fun, Oren Ben-Kiki |
From: Clark C . E. <cc...@cl...> - 2001-07-16 09:28:03
|
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 11:14:07AM +0200, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote: | I don't know. I agree with Jason that counting characters | isn't fun. A few more comments here: (a) Most of the time you won't be editing the file only reading it; as editing will be done through the interface. (b) If you want to edit using columns, get an editor like XEDIT (http://www.lightlink.com/hessling/THE/) that has exelent block handling (vi and emacs leave alot to be desired... editor war! *evil grin*). | My problem with the '|' syntax is that it is so, well, | *verbose*. And it is actually less human-friendly when | editing a file - if you want to paste a chunk of text | into your YAML document as a block, you can't just paste | & indent it, you need to add these pesky '|' characters | to each line. My way you could just paste, indent, and | copy the indentation in between the '<' ... '>' pair. Right, or insert N spaces... <<N | This seems like the easiest way you could do it, except | of course for the classical Perl way: | | block: <<ARBITRARY-END-OF-BLOCK | block here, not indented | ARBITRARY-END-OF-BLOCK | | I have to admit, it has its charm (simplicity, robustness). | True, it isn't indented, but I'm wondering how important | that is for a large chunk of pre-formatted text (e.g., code) | with reasonably long lines. Especially when this text is | given as a value to a key which isn't at the top level: | | map: % | key: % | sub-key: % | sub-sub-key: | |Long line here - more readable? | as-opposed-to: <<BLOCK | Long line here - less readable? | BLOCK | | I'm having second thoughts... Let them scroll. *smirk* Clark |
From: Jason D. <ja...@in...> - 2001-07-17 06:03:22
|
> | I don't know. I agree with Jason that counting characters > | isn't fun. > > A few more comments here: > > (a) Most of the time you won't be editing > the file only reading it; as editing > will be done through the interface. If I have to use an interface other than a text editor to edit YAML then I won't want to use it. YAML is supposed to be simpler than XML. It would seem rather silly if you could easily edit XML in a text editor but not YAML, don't you think? Jason. |