Trying to jam your configuration into a generic object notation is always going to be awkward and ugly, the only real saving grace might be that it is a standard syntax.

I use a lot of openbsd and one of the things I really like about it is that they care about the user interface(note 1) and take the time to build custom parsers(note 2)

Compare pf to iptables. I think, strictly speaking, ip tables is the more feature-full filter language. but the devs said "we will just use getopt to parse it" and called it a day. leading to what I find one of the ugliest, more painful languages to use. pf is an absolute joy in comparison. I would pick pf for that reason alone.

note 1. Not in the sense of chasing graphical configurators. An activity I find wastes vast amounts of developer time leading to neutered interfaces. But in the sense of taking the time to lay out a syntax that is pleasant to read and edit and then write good documentation for it.

note 2. If I am honest, semi custom parsers, the standard operating procedure appears to start with a parse.y from a project that is close and mold it into the form needed. which lends itself to a nice sort of consistency in the base system.