gojq VS nq

Yeap i've talked to itchyny quite a lot about various changes https://github.com/itchyny/gojq/issues/153 and also upstreamed quite a lot 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 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 :)

For query language i didn't prototype much, i know i really wanted jq as i had already used it extensively and know it was very powerful and had a terse syntax when working with structured data. I had some ideas of maybe using the C-version of jq via bindings or somehow let fq be tool that you used like this 'fq file | jq ... | fq' but it just felt strange and not very user friendly. Then i found gojq and i just felt that i have to make it work somehow, even if it would require lots of hard work and change to it (see https://github.com/wader/gojq/commits/fq, the JQValue change it probably to most interesting and support or custom iterators/functions that has been merged). And it turned out much better than i would expected, large parts becuse gojq's code is very nice and author has been very helpful.

If you want something quick and janky, I suggest nq. It's stupidly simple and lightweight; it just requires that everyone is running as the same user. And only lets exactly one job of any kind run in a given queue. There's basically zero configuration; just nq , and it'll either start running , or will wait its turn.

For your ad-hoc uses, I would introduce nq. It's an extremely lightweight queuing system, which gives you two things with minimal overhead:

I'm already aware of alternatives which I will consider (at, nq, snooze, but I still want an accurate lightweight CLI stopwatch/timer app and the script otherwise works well--this is more of an exercise on understanding background processes and could be handy in other scripts. Or if the attempt is considdered hacky and ill-advised, I'm curious of an alternative implementation. I just feel nothing is more simple than a very lightweight C-based timer app that exits 0 after specified time has elapsed and don't want to run a cron job or even a while sleep 1 loop for a reminder (sleep isn't even a builtin...).

Interesting project. Unfortunate that its name conflicts with one of nq’s executables (https://github.com/leahneukirchen/nq), but I’m not sure anything can be done about it.

nq