From: Brian Candler <b.candler@...>
Date: 2010-09-22T20:20:23+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby-based data language

Thomas Sawyer wrote:
> But if you look at Ruby-based configuration files
> they always use block-based DSL notations, not hashes.

I'd have said most packages use YAML. If you can provide examples which 
use method_missing and block-based structure just for conveying static 
configuration information, I'd be interested to see them. But then 
that's what you asked for in the first place :-)

> So the analogy
> isn't over the data structure, but rather the use of the underlying
> language as a syntax model.

The difference is that JSON *is* a direct subset of Javascript, and can 
be eval'd directly to give a value.

Let me put it another way. If you were parsing your example:

  name "Joe Foo"
  age 33
  contact do
    email "joe@joefoo.com"
    phione "555-555-1234"
  end

would you expect as Hash oas the result?

If yes: then it looks like you're proposing an alternative syntax for 
Hash literals - one which isn't widely used. It's Ruby-inspired but not 
really Ruby, since a simple eval of the above will fail without 
additional supporting code. It would be similar to Builder, but (a) 
creating a Hash as its output instead of XML, and (b) intended for use 
with untrusted inputs, so parsed rather than eval'd.

If no: then what do you expect to get instead? I suppose you could have 
a stream parser API, and trigger start/end actions as you go, but that's 
not a very convenient API for reading a config file.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.