Hacker News Reader

Comment by robertlagrant | Hacker News Reader

Sounds good! It might be worth making your format support table have more granularity to show levels of maturity/implementation for each format the tool supports.

View on HN

I would also be interested in some more detail on this bullet:

  - *qq* is not a full *jq/\*q* replacement and comes with idiosyncrasies from the underlying gojq library

what is qq missing that jq has? Is that the same question as "what is gojq missing that jq has"?

From [1], there are a few differences that arise from gojq ignoring object key sort order (which you shouldn't really rely on anyway).

[1] https://github.com/itchyny/gojq#difference-to-jq

That’s it pretty much the only thing of note I’ve encountered. But yes I just mean it may not be a perfect drop in replace in all existing scripts at this time for jq like tools for other formats since they will likely take a lot of care in having the encoder for their designated format working well. qq still has a few bugs to iron out and more testing to do.

Note that gojq also fixes and improves on some things compared to jq, like arbitrary-precision arithmetic (jq only preserves), some semantic and parsing improvement and fixes that will likely happen in jq at some point also, time zone/formatting/parsing fixes, etc

Reply on news.ycombinator.com