It took some getting used to... I "like" it the same way that I "like" writing XSLs: I thank my lucky stars that jq and XSLT/XPath exist, but if I didn't have

It took some getting used to... I "like" it the same way that I "like" writing XSLs: I thank my lucky stars that jq and XSLT/XPath exist, but if I didn't have to deal with JSON/XML I wouldn't use jq/XSLT. That reasoning seems circular, but at least jq is significantly more general than XSLT. Though to be fair I like jq a lot better than I like XSLT. All functional languages tend to take some getting used to, at least for me. Now that I have a mental model of jq, I do actually enjoy using it. The terse syntax is a double-edged sword.