Implement YAML module.

[blackwinter]

Based off of JSON module. But not every feature of the JSON implementation can be (easily/reasonably) supported in the YAML implementation (decoder: optional comments, JsonPath; encoder: root value separator, (optional) pretty printing).

Maybe there's room for consolidation, though, with YAML being a superset of JSON. Both pairs of classes could (should?) have a common superclass implementing the actual decoding/encoding.

Fixes #399.

[acka47]

@blackwinter please merge

[blackwinter]

So we're not going to discuss the intrinsic relationship between the two modules? Are we content with the duplication?

[dr0i]

• functional review: @TobiasNx
• code review: @fsteeg

[acka47]

So we're not going to discuss the intrinsic relationship between the two modules? Are we content with the duplication?

You are right. We got confused about where we are in the process. @fsteeg will review.

[fsteeg]

Yay, YAML support, many thanks! I think the partial duplication of the JSON module is fine, we can always extract a superclass later, when/if we see that we're actually building/fixing stuff in both modules.

[blackwinter]

we can always extract a superclass later, when/if we see that we're actually building/fixing stuff in both modules.

Well, let's hope we don't forget... 🙂

[fsteeg]

Well, let's hope we don't forget... 🙂

One could argue that we should wait for supporting a third JSON-like format before we even consider extracting it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(computer_programming)