Gojq: Pure Go Implementation of Jq

Re:Gojq: Pure Go Implementation of Jq by eropple on Sunday August 21, 2022 @04:01PM (#32543864)

I agree with you that there's value to sorted keys from a presentational standpoint (we are not beep-boop robots, humans have to read this stuff too), but now there also exists a JSON canonicalization RFC that tools can/should follow (with all the usual caveats about canonicalization being fraught): https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8785

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gojq: Pure Go Implementation of Jq by mdaniel on Sunday August 21, 2022 @05:57PM (#32544862)

I guess "Informational" is better than /dev/null, but unless everyone adopts it doesn't that run the risk of it just being My Favorite Canonicalization™?

Either way, I'm guessing if the gojq author has that much heartburn about implementing --sort-keys, --canonical is just absolutely off the table :-(

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gojq: Pure Go Implementation of Jq by tialaramex on Sunday August 21, 2022 @08:47PM (#32546006)

> unless everyone adopts it doesn't that run the risk of it just being My Favorite Canonicalization

That's true regardless. The IETF has no enforcement arm. Even if people expend the effort to agree a standard, and make whatever signs and follow the rituals, if nobody implements it then de facto that isn't the standard after all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gojq: Pure Go Implementation of Jq by fwip on Sunday August 21, 2022 @05:31PM (#32544661)

Thank you for letting me know! I hadn't thought to look.

[ Parent | on HN ]