5 ms·

Did someone say let's represent structured data as json? a bit of shameless plug: https://github.com/wader/fq https://github.com/wader/fq :) It's using a fork o

• mdaniel 3y ago
  Oh, I didn't know that; how cool! Have you asked itchyny about their interest in upstreaming the changes <https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/compare/main...wader:gojq:fq https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/compare/main...wader:gojq:fq>? they don't look completely out of alignment with gojq and it would make reasoning about "gojq version what?" in fq easier and the inverse merge of theirs versus your fork seems to have a substantial changelog entry https://github.com/wader/gojq/compare/fq...itchyny:gojq:main https://github.com/wader/gojq/compare/fq...itchyny:gojq:main
  • wwader 3y ago
    Yeap i've talked to itchyny quite a lot about various changes https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/issues/153 https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/issues/153 and also upstreamed quite a lot https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/issues?q=author%3Awader https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/issues?q=author%3Awader like custom iterators (to allow eval, own iterators and "empty" functions), query marshalling (query rewrite tricks) and a bunch of small things and bug fixes. But the largest change to add a JQValue interface is quite complex, other changes like extended literals is also a bit tricky. Hmm weird list of changes for https://github.com/wader/gojq/compare/fq...itchyny:gojq:main https://github.com/wader/gojq/compare/fq...itchyny:gojq:main but i guess it is because i haven't kept my main branch in sync. The fq branch should be based on latest gojq/main as of now. I usually try to rebase as quick as possible. Let me know if you have any other questions or want to help out! maybe email etc as i usually don't check HN comments replies that often :)