Re:Q: A faster re-implementaiton of jq written in Reason Nat...
by ashtonkem on Monday September 14, 2020 @10:39AM
(#24470669)
My most common jq usage is to copy and paste some json into quotes to make it easier to read. My second most common action is to chain curl and jq together. A replacement for jq that doesn’t use stdin is literally useless to me.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Q: A faster re-implementaiton of jq written in Reason Nat...
by yawaramin on Monday September 14, 2020 @01:03PM
(#24472467)
I think at least two people in the thread pointed out that you can use /dev/stdin as a file.
Re:Q: A faster re-implementaiton of jq written in Reason Nat...
by ashtonkem on Monday September 14, 2020 @01:42PM
(#24472882)
That’s a cumbersome extra step for unclear benefit.
Yes, q is supposedly faster than jq. But it is exceedingly rare for me to ever have any performance problems with jq, especially since it’s essentially a one off utility I use occasionally, not as part of the hot loop of any workflow where performance matters.
Re:Q: A faster re-implementaiton of jq written in Reason Nat...
by yawaramin on Monday September 14, 2020 @10:50PM
(#24477445)
In that case I suppose you wouldn't use it.
Re:Q: A faster re-implementaiton of jq written in Reason Nat...
by monadic2 on Monday September 14, 2020 @01:09PM
(#24472543)
It's more than a little strange that isn't default behavior out of the box without specifying input. How do the authors think jq is used?