Can I get some eyes on the WIP jq track?

Hello maintainers,

Call to action!

I’ve been building out a jq track (GitHub - exercism/jq: Exercism exercises in jq.). It has been “soft launched” at so maintainers should be able to see it.

It would be really helpful if a few people could take a run though the track and look for mistakes/improvements/etc. Particularly in the documentation and extra-particularly in the concepts. Feedback here or as a github issue is most welcome.

It’s been great fun to learn the language while creating the track. I’m super excited to share the track, and I’m :pinching_hand: this close I think.

Thanks folks!


I’ll give it a spin :nerd_face:


I’ve used jq in the past, for simple things. I’ll give this a go and see how far I manage to get before getting stuck :smiley:

1 Like

Clicking on “Your published solution” ( is not showing me the solution. Instead, I just land back on the exercise page (

This might just be a “unreleased track” bug, though.

It also might be a “hello-world” specific quirk: there’s no “Community solutions” tab on the HW Exercise, for any track I think. I get the same thing on the Perl track for instance. @ErikSchierboom is this a bug?

I’m collecting some minor corrections in a PR here: Patch 1 by BTowersCoding · Pull Request #74 · exercism/jq · GitHub

A general thing I’m noticing is that the test output is truncated right before the part I’d
like to see, which is rather unfortunate. I’m not sure if that could be addressed.


Initial impression: the basics is a lot to take in. Might this be worth splitting into incremental steps?

1 Like

There is also Improvements needed in shopping-list exercise · Issue #72 · exercism/jq · GitHub for this concept exercise.

That would be nice. The thing is that jq is quite a different language from what people are accustomed to. For instance, ruby’s basics essentially says (to my recollection) “ruby has functions like other languages”. There’s probably some example snippets that can be left out, and the functions & operators can be trimmed.

That being said, I’m open to suggestions.

No, this is as designed. We don’t want to show community solutions for Hello World.

There’s a link where you can view your own published solution … which doesn’t work. Should the link/section not be shown?

I finished the syllabus! I found it very well written. The exercises took me a bit more work than I anticipated. For the ingredients exercise, it might be helpful, if possible, to actually leave the json data file there for users to use to try things out. Having it hidden inside the bats file makes it harder to mess around with it.

1 Like

@IsaacG Funny, I just did that and came here to announce it!

In the editor now, there are tabs for

  • shopping.jq (the solution) and
  • shopping-list.json (the test data, read-only)

It’s also a separate file for CLI users.

I had to reset the track to see the changes, perhaps I just didn’t wait long enough.

For those who have done the Basics concept and the Shopping List exercise, do the points listed in Improvements needed in shopping-list exercise · Issue #72 · exercism/jq · GitHub resonate?

view your own published solution … which doesn’t work

It takes a minute or two for the “snippet” of your solution to be created.


  1. Having comments with what’s needed next in the editor makes lift simpler.
  2. I got tripped up over lacking the () for |length.
  3. I’ve done this in the past, so it wasn’t a big deal. But it took me a while to realize I needed to access a second list of ingredients. That part confused me.
  4. Definitely.
  5. This is the part that gave me the hardest time. I ended up using toentries | fromentries in my first iteration.

They do indeed address the very points that were confusing.

I had to download the exercise locally to make sense of what was going on, which was fine as long as I used WSL, while i saw there is a native Windows binary for jq, this is likely not recommended for this because the differences for shell quoting in Powershell get incredibly complicated. Making it more accessible in the online editor would be a priority imo.

Please add some comments to the issue if there are further areas of confusion.

Do you think this is worth a mention in one of the docs?

two-fer has hints in the stub. Should those be moved to the hints file and/or instructions.append file?