|
|
|
|
|
|
by wildwildtest
1415 days ago
|
|
|
> Except … I think that’s the sleight of hand occurring right, it’s reasonable to say he might mot have linked to it, but the purpose of the repo was not to shame the author. It might be my own predilection, but it strikes me as dishonest to say “I didn’t mind this” and then imply the opposite. > Additionally … Right, me too, they both occur. I don’t think I actually specified an argument as to why json5 is bad or even argued that it was. My comment is mainly about the article itself. This whole paragraph reads as an argument to not use json5 given that it is very much trying to perfect the imperfect json, which most people just get on with. |
|
|