pq VS jp

Why use a special syntax that's hard to remember when you can just use Python?

I wrote a jq-like that accepts Python syntax called pq: https://github.com/dvolk/pq

So you can write stuff like:

    $ echo '{ "US": 3, "China": 12, "UK": 1 }' | pq -c "sum(data.values())"

If you want to use jq but with Python syntax, I wrote pq:

https://github.com/dvolk/pq

I have a hard time suggesting such a thing, because I find JMESPath incredibly inferior to jq's expressiveness, but if you're in the AWS ecosystem much, you may enjoy https://github.com/jmespath/jp#readme which uses the same query language as does awscli (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cli/latest/userguide/cli-usage-f...). That may at least pay more dividends than keeping jq's language in your head where it will only ever be used by jq

Have you tried this utility instead: https://github.com/jmespath/jp

There’s also jp, which interprets JMESPath: https://github.com/jmespath/jp

This one has the advantage of being natively understood by aws-cli, meaning you can pass a JMESPath to an AWS call and only receive the filtered / transformed result back.