renzev@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 9 days agoAI's take on XMLlemmy.worldimagemessage-square138fedilinkarrow-up11.23Karrow-down122
arrow-up11.21Karrow-down1imageAI's take on XMLlemmy.worldrenzev@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 9 days agomessage-square138fedilink
minus-squareannoyed-onion@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up146arrow-down2·9 days agoI mean, it’s not wrong…
minus-squareSerinus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up20arrow-down2·8 days agoDisagree. I prefer XML for config files where the efficiency of disk size doesn’t matter at all. Layers of XML are much easier to read than layers of Json. Json is generally better where efficiency matters.
minus-squareMatriks404@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·8 days agoAren’t most XML parsers faster than JSON parsers anyway?
I mean, it’s not wrong…
Wishful thinking
Disagree. I prefer XML for config files where the efficiency of disk size doesn’t matter at all. Layers of XML are much easier to read than layers of Json. Json is generally better where efficiency matters.
Aren’t most XML parsers faster than JSON parsers anyway?
TOML or bust
yes.