Add a script to verify json syntax #105
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is a useful sanity check to have as we start adding shared test data.
kytrinyx
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2015
Add a script to verify json syntax
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a useful sanity check to have as we start adding shared
test data.
It uses the
jqlibrary, which is a compiled C binary. It might be a bit heavy-handed, sincejqis actually all about parsing and querying JSON on the command-line, but the other options were to install NPM to use a javascript library, or to use Ruby or Python, or build a small sanity-checker in Go. Since jq already exists and it's light-weight, I figured that was the best choice right now.I didn't find any mature bash libraries that could validate json.
Another option would be to use
curlto hit jsonlint.com--but somehow that feels a bit dirty.