I hate new DUB config format

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 27 November 2015 at 19:42:43 UTC, Chris wrote:
> At the end of the day, all markup, data exchange or description 
> languages are not easy on the eye. It's a question of "which is 
> worse", and that's often a question of personal taste.

Yes, syntax is rather personal! Some GNU people want Lisp as the 
universal config format + scripting language (guile)... I 
understand their motivation and reasoning, but I don't want it... 
8-)

But technical merits and tooling is  a more objective criteria, 
and right now XML and all the associated standards provides best 
interop, ability to describe the content to non DUB tools on a 
meta level, transforms, queries, etc.

> I'm sure that we would have a similar discussion, if we had 
> YAML, XML, TOML or whatever. It doesn't really matter. But what 
> does matter is that we use a well known standardized format.

Just define a canonical XML format for advanced use, which is 
used internally and for interchange, then provide the common 
stuff as easy-to-read YAML / JSON. That way 90% can use the easy 
version, and all advanced or experimental 
shoot-yourself-in-the-foot functionality is hidden from newbies.

The DUB tooling would just generate the XML from the newbie 
format.

One can have it both ways. :)