New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat: move to jq #6539
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
feat: move to jq #6539
Conversation
Considering |
Thanks. I'll check it out. 😄 |
I think we would still use node-jq instead of using another as jq is quite popular and its simplicity as well as performance. For this PR, I guess we should have backwards compatibility with users are using JSONPath in their collections. As we drop the JSONPath, it would ruin the chain requests where the JSONPath is used to query. |
Well, I think I'll try with this approach then. Copying the node-jq lib along with the binaries and minimizing the lib source code inside insomnia. That would somehow be a better way. Love to hear the feedbacks. |
@kobenguyent thanks for the pr 👍. Adding extra binaries makes the build process highly dependent on them (currently we use node-libcurl) and makes testing and deploying to different platforms more difficult. So we avoid adding them unless the benefits are worth it. It will be helpful if you explain the pros/cons of jq and what are your motivations/features this will support |
thanks @gatzjames for looking into this. So yeah, maybe this explains better than myself IMHO, jq resolves many issues as we are currently having with JSONPath also its simplicity and performance are two pros worth mentioning 😄 |
Ping, I'm really excited about this feature and can’t wait to see it in action! |
Motivation: jq, while being more powerful than JSONPath, nevertheless enables one to write queries that are usually as simple as, and sometimes even simpler than, the corresponding JSONPath queries.
resolves #777
resolves #3258
resolves #2342
resolves #3155
Screen.Recording.2023-09-21.at.09.20.48.mov