json5 VS jq

JSON5 support

Meanwhile, formats have been evolving (JSON5, YAML), config entry points are constantly changing. These fluctuations, fortunately, were covered by tools like the cosmiconfig.

I think JSON5 is fairly close to this: https://json5.org

I reckon the only thing it's missing to be truly accessible to non-techies is that string values still need to be quoted, i.e. you can't have:

key: this is my value

(I'm definitely not saying it would be a good idea to allow quotes to be dropped, just that that's the only potential stumbling block I see for non-techies.)

I believe that's JSON5.

https://github.com/json5/json5

It's my preferred configuration file format, it fixes all the problems I have with JSON (trailing commas, comments) without turning it into a mess full of gotchas like YAML.

JSON 5 support

I would like to see mention of JSON5 which is 11 years its elder. For comments in JSON, JSON5 is a good starting point.

That should recursively list directories, counting only the files within each, and output² jsonl that can be further mangled within the shell². You could just as easily populate an associative array for further work, or $whatever. Unlike bash, zsh has reasonable behaviour around quoting and whitespace too.

¹ https://zsh.sourceforge.io/Doc/Release/User-Contributions.ht...

² https://github.com/jpmens/jo

³ https://github.com/stedolan/jq

What I miss from jq and what is implemented but unreleased is platform independent line delimiters.

jq on Windows produces \r\n terminated lines which can be annoying when used with Cygwin / MSYS2 / WSL. The '--binary' option to not convert line delimiters is one of those pending improvements.

https://github.com/stedolan/jq/commit/0dab2b18d73e561f511801...

If you have jq installed you can use it to make the output look nicer.

It requires jq for JSON processing and GNU parallel for concurrent searches in the notebooks.

jq is your friend.

The jq command (https://stedolan.github.io/jq/) is useful pulling that information out.