I did look at jackson-jq before I considered java-jq, but it is a re-implementation of jq and this statement on that site puts me off: "jackson-jq aims to be a compatible jq implementation. However, not all the features are available; some features are not relevant as being a java library and some features are just yet to be implemented."
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:57 AM Owen Nichols <onich...@pivotal.io> wrote: > For a pure-java implementation, might be worth considering > https://github.com/eiiches/jackson-jq > > > On Sep 25, 2019, at 9:40 AM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > +1 - sounds good. > > > > BTW - We've previously found libraries that use JNA tend to be more > > flaky/platform dependent than pure java libaries - for example we ripped > > out a snappy native wrapper in favor of a pure java implementation. > > > > -Dan > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:39 AM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > >> Sounds good, thanks for the heads up. > >> > >> Anthony > >> > >> > >>> On Sep 25, 2019, at 8:37 AM, Jinmei Liao <jil...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >>> > >>> Management rest api wants to add some default jq selector to the > swagger > >>> api docs so that the downstream client tool can use it as a starting > >> point > >>> to filter/format the json response to a more readable form. In order to > >>> test these jq selectors, we would like to use a java library described > >>> here: https://github.com/arakelian/java-jq, it basically provides a > java > >>> wrapper around 'jq' tool. Github shows both MIT and apache license. We > >> will > >>> only be using it for testing. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Cheers > >>> > >>> Jinmei > >> > >> > > -- Cheers Jinmei
