Opinion. Likely controversial. The fact that we need jq highlights that we are missing this functionality in shells. I argue that these days (nested) structured data is as basic requirement as having scalars, arrays and associative arrays (which bash has). It hurts my eyes seeing five line of assignment to variables where each one runs jq to extract that particular field from a data structure.

More at "jq is a symptom" - https://ilya-sher.org/2018/09/10/jq-is-a-symptom/

Related and might be interesting - "JSON tools for command line" - https://ilya-sher.org/2018/04/10/list-of-json-tools-for-comm...

How is

    $ echo "$json" | cljq '(? $ "root" * 1)'

more intuitive than the good ol' jq

    $ echo "$json" | jq '.root | map(.[1])'

Really, people should know by now that jq does point-free programming.

The sentiment resonates with me.

Had similar thoughts a couple years ago, and wrote jql[0] as a jq alternative with a lispy syntax (custom, not Common Lisp), and I’ve been using it for command-line JSON processing ever since!

[0]: https://github.com/cube2222/jql

> I seriously dislike jq's convoluted, impossible-to-remember ad hoc DSL that instantly joined heaps of misery like CMake and gnuplot in my heart.

I like jq and gnuplot quite well. Makes me want to try CMake out ;)

I learned the basics of jq and quite liked it, but since I discovered Nushell it has replaced nearly all my data processing I do at the cli. It really is good technology.