orderless VS up

orderless. A highly configurable completion style that matches multiple patterns in any order against minibuffer completion candidates.

An example relevant to your list would be some changes many people are taking with their completion framework - using package that leverage core emacs functionality rather than replacing it with a complete package that 'overrides' it. Consult, vertico, orderless and associate packages come to mind here. If you do a bit of a search you'll find plenty of info. Here is a video from Prot on the subject, but there are many others as well. I think Prot actually went on to write his own completion system to overlay native emacs functionality as well.

You didn't mention, so I'll ask, are you using the orderless (https://github.com/oantolin/orderless) completion style?

Fuzzy completion ala Orderless would be awesome: hitting space during completion acts as a pattern separator.

I dunno—I like how Vertico+Counsel feel. I'm not sure how good the support for Orderless and Embark are in Ivy, but I really like how those packages compose so nicely with the Vertico+Consult ecosystem.

In general, you want either orderless or prescient, with my personal preference being the former.

You probably want to investigate completion styles. There are many builtin styles, from basic, which just does prefix completion, on up. But there are also 3rd party styles. One of the most powerful is called orderless. Considering all these styles, there really is a ton of flexibility in how you can get to a completion candidate like some-named-something (some, s-n-s, sns, soso, [a-z]{4}-na, e\b \bs, ...). You can even configure more than one style at a time (and usually do).

Well, I've written some general purpose Emacs packages (orderless and embark) that I use a lot, but I also write Emacs Lisp for one-off tasks.

I like it. Would be nice to see orderless-style (https://github.com/oantolin/orderless) completion, and a config not to enter the directory by narrowing the completion to one, requiring enter to be pressed.

This fx rewrite is very exciting. I'll have to try it. I thought of fx as a wrapper around jq, that allowed quick iteration over building jq scripts. Sort of an Ultimate Plumber [1] but only for jq. It looks like it is now more like a JavaScript processor plus an interactive viewer.

Someone mention Visidata[2]? VisiData is also a TUI that is great on tabular data, and it can work with json. If your JSON is mostly tabular in nature, Visidata does a great job at showing that data and allowing you to explore it. A lot of json I deal with is tabular-like data. There is a great tutorial [3], that can help you get your bearings with Visidata. Once you understand those basics you might want to look at this thread [4] for what commands you can use with json.

[1] Ultimate Plumber: https://github.com/akavel/up

Ultimate plumber can do this.

https://github.com/akavel/up

Been using up for years but this looks nice too

Fun. But I can achieve the same result (I think) with ultimate plumber and regular jq, but without being restricted just to jq. Feel free to correct me.

Up - The Ultimate Plumber makes the best pipes !

As an alternative allowing the use of any shell command/pipeline on the results interactively, see also: https://github.com/akavel/up

Would https://github.com/akavel/up solve your problem?