pkoppstein

@caramdache - Regarding `distinct` - first, it seems to me that including `distinct` is far more useful (not least because otherwise you can easily get counterproductive multiplicative behavior); second, you...

@caramdache - please note that left_joins/6 has been corrected. The arity-6 filters are intended to be “low-level building blocks”(*) whereas all the others are intended to be more familiar -...

@caramdache -- 1. Thanks for testing! 2. As I mentioned, the arity-6 filters are intended to be "low-level" stream-oriented filters. If any of the others are applicable, it would make...

@itchyny wrote: > This is a language change. Any thoughts from other maintainers? Thanks for the opportunity to ask what backward-compatibility issue this change entails. My main question (posed purely...

@davidawad - I won't speculate about the future directions of jq, but I think your main choice for the foreseeable future will be which tool to use amongst those that...

There's a sort-free version of `unique` (called `uniques`) in the jq Cookbook: https://github.com/stedolan/jq/wiki/Cookbook#using_bag_to_implement_a_sort_free_version_of_unique And similarly for unique_by: ``` # Emit a stream of the distinct values of stream modulo f,...