Valid settings not recognized in settings.json

[SharakPL]

It would be nice to have a proper structure in settings.json. eg. to have this:

instead of this:

And it works both ways! The problem is these grouped settings are not recognized properly:

vscsettingsjson.mp4

Does this issue occur when all extensions are disabled?: Yes

• VS Code Version: 1.84.2
• OS Version: WIndows 11 23H2

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Open settings.json
2. Change any setting to a json object

[goyalyashpal]

have a proper structure in settings.json
2. json object

i was thinking on same lines just 2-3 days ago, that toml allows both formats
it would make the state of settings to be very manually manageable (see here: #198081 (comment))

it would drastically simplify my configuration as well.

but the question is, does the .json format used allow this? i tried in the "debug console" off of from a dummy debug session with extension ms-vscode.js-debug the following:

> extCr = { "settings" : { "extensions.autoUpdate": false, "extensions.enableExperiments": false, } }
<- {settings: {…}}

> extProp = { "settings" : { "extensions": { "autoUpdate": false, "enableExperiments": false, } } }
<- {settings: {…}}

> extCr.settings.extensions
<- undefined

> extProp.settings.extensions
<- {autoUpdate: false, enableExperiments: false}

so, these two i.e. {"breadcrumbs.icons": "false", "breadcrumbs.showFields": false} is not same as {"breadcrumbs": {"icons": false, "showFields": false}} - javascript just doesn't work that way.

so, i suppose the solution can be in either of these forms:

1. change the settings to accept proper json objects, rather than strings as keys.
2. semantically move away from standard json - doing some logic on the backend where these are read; or
3. providing option to use some other config format (which then, say, transpiles to the javascript or json or whatever is required here)

---

refences:

• https://toml.io/en/v1.0.0#table
• Cross-extension setting groups #198081 (comment)

[goyalyashpal]

• after motivated by toots regarding "have u used profiles" all around here (most recently: this Support loading/storing view layout/locations in settings.json #198611 (comment)),
• as apparently it is more capable than settings.json as it can contain the layout information, as well as enable/disable extensions, etc which the former can't
• i thought about finally looking at the profiles feature and the generated profiles.code-profile file, and
• oh my my. what a ... it was 🤦 . it had more backslashes than vanilla lisp has parenthesis; it had no directly parseable structure what-so-ever.

it was plain collection of strings - i suppose all it does is take those strings, and output them in their own separate files - which would consume the backslashes, and produces the normal .json files used elsewhere in vscode.

conclusion? - i didn't find anything fruitful in this regard in that file.

here's its structure:

{
    "name": "",
    "settings": "",
    "keybindings": "",
    "snippets": "",
    "extensions": "",
    "globalState": ""
}

---

2023-11-02

• Continuing my investigation, F1 > "Show profiles(s|contents)" > UI State > globalState.json
• i used extensions like andyyaldoo.vscode-json and chouzz.vscode-better-align

and it seems to be that vscode team is trying to avoid specifying nested objects, and rather escaping it & putting it as string.

but i can't understand why?

this makes it super hard to read. make the invesitgations multi-multi step & not toolable. and make tweaking & testing things up manually near impossible.

[LunarLanding]

I think this might be why #43670 (comment)
It seems support for managing settings.json is becoming lackluster, which is concerning; declarative configurations are easier to debug than UI widgets.
In order to manage my config, I found out I could not sort it in vscode because it had keys that started with *.
I sorted mine by using this python snippet.

def sort_settings_s(s):
    true=True
    false=False
    f=lambda d: {k:f(d[k]) for k in sorted(list(d.keys()))} if isinstance(d,dict) else d
    s2=f(eval(s))
    return json.dumps(s2,indent=' '*4)

[vscodenpa]

We closed this issue because we don't plan to address it in the foreseeable future. If you disagree and feel that this issue is crucial: we are happy to listen and to reconsider.

If you wonder what we are up to, please see our roadmap and issue reporting guidelines.

Thanks for your understanding, and happy coding!

[goyalyashpal]

I think this might be why #43670 (comment)

Now that we have the settings UI, we aren't investing much in the JSON editor

classic MS - our target audience is gooey using masses. though we love to name our tools as "power*" , but we dont like power users.

It seems support for managing settings.json is becoming lackluster, which is concerning; declarative configurations are easier to debug than UI widgets.

exactly what i was feeilng with the *.code-profiles becoming face of all things config related. and that file, like i said, is super "un"-toolable and is plain-text only on face of it

[goyalyashpal]

hey all! i have created a proposal which can help in grouping settings. though, not as properly as this, but still much better than no grouping. can u take a look?

• to better group/organise configs, use array [ ] at root level in settings.json #200686