3 ms·

The problem with XSLT is how incredibly verbose it is, but maybe that's just the problem with XML. jq is to JSON as XSLT/XPath is to XML, which shows you can h

• masklinn 3y ago
  > maybe that's just the problem with XML It’s the problem from having built XSLT out of XML, that was completely unnecessary. And then with XSLT being so verbose, having cheaped out and made the current node (“.”) so implicit. And the confusion from the dual use of templates as both match/patch and function constructs (it would have worked fine as a shortcut, but it makes grokking how things fit much harder than necessary). I wouldn’t say jq is really comparable to xslt though, xslt has much more transformative flexibility. It’s closer to xquery.
  • cryptonector 3y ago
    > I wouldn’t say jq is really comparable to xslt though, xslt has much more transformative flexibility. It’s closer to xquery. jq isn't structured around data schema transformations, it's true, so writing complex transforms is not as easy as with XSLT, but it is very much possible. Essentially it's a reduction over [possibly paths to] elements of interest in `.` updating the reduction state with the new schema. You can organize your code into functions that do much what XSLs do.