Jqfmt like gofmt, but for jq

Re:Jqfmt like gofmt, but for jq by quotemstr on Monday July 21, 2025 @07:22PM (#44641488)

jq is convenient, but I don't see the draw in building data processing pipelines on it. It's like writing complex software in shell.

Recently, I found myself wanting to do a join by filename on two sets of about 300,000 files. Tried bashing my head against jq with INDEX and various tricks and couldn't get the runtime below minutes.

Then I just gave up, fired up Python, loaded the dataset into Pandas, and did a join. Completed too fast to notice.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jqfmt like gofmt, but for jq by porridgeraisin on Monday July 21, 2025 @09:44PM (#44642435)

> bash

Did the `join` command help?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jqfmt like gofmt, but for jq by quotemstr on Monday July 21, 2025 @10:48PM (#44642785)

No. join in jq is just syntactic sugar over object property lookup anyway. Turns out index() was the expensive step.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jqfmt like gofmt, but for jq by porridgeraisin on Friday July 25, 2025 @01:59AM (#44680014)

I meant the coreutils join command.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jqfmt like gofmt, but for jq by ghProTip on Tuesday July 22, 2025 @12:41AM (#44643292)

Created this tiny JavaScript project and published on npm for when you just can't be arsed remembering/learning JQ: https://www.npmjs.com/package/jsling .

Not shilling it so much as saying.. IMHO, for a lot of use cases, there are far better approaches than dealing with the occasional JQ struggle bus ride.

[ Parent | on HN ]