I actually use Python a lot more than Javascript. That's why the double quotes and the no trailing comma are always what get me.

Especially since leaving the trailing comma is considered the best practice in every other language.

JS added support for a trailing comma, and single-vs-double quote is a contentious topic in Python land!

Python dicts are a lot closer to JSON than YAML.

The real schism here, IMO, is Programmer Intuitive vs. Natural Language Intuitive.

Second this. I have used Python dict to write the default config file and JSON Schema to validate a user-supplied config file, which worked quite well in regard of that purpose.

Python objects and JSON are practically identical.

In what sense could this be true? Python objects support a whole host of behavior; JSON is a data format. Python dicts might be a closer analogy except Python keys can be anything that is hashable while JSON requires strings, and of course Python dict values can be any Python value; not just the JSON analogs.

I think you are purposely mis-interpreting me. Python dicts are practically, syntactically identical to JSON. Yes, python dict values can be any python value the same way JSON in JS can be any JS value. Point being, someone coming from python would see JSON as identical to a python dict. We can run around in semantic circles all day.

> I think you are purposely mis-interpreting me.

You misrepresented yourself by saying "object" when you meant "dict" and saying "practically identical" when you meant "vaguely syntactically similar". I wasn't trying to nitpick your semantics; I just had no idea that "Python objects are practically identical to JSON" meant "Python dicts are to Python what JSON objects are to JS, oh and also Python dicts have some syntactic similarlities to JSON" or whatever.

You sure are difficult. There is a non-trivial set of text that is both valid JSON and a valid python dict. Many people would consider the two very similar.