A couple thoughts here.
First off, what are the advantages of regex queries here? One of the major advantages of GraphQL alongside libraries like Relay or Apollo is that there are strict, easy to understand data requirements that are tightly coupled to view logic. I know my server API, why would I want something like this? Especially in considering the regex keys incur a non-trivial performance penalty.
This page comes across misleading or disingenuous at worst:
1. "JrGQL" is listed as a non "new language" even though GraphQL's spec was published before it came out, and has been in use at Facebook since 2012. I'd imagine this is because jrGQL uses JSON. It still requires parsing on top of JSON. I don't know why the author thinks this counts as a non-new language.
2. All of the jrGQL "features" listed in green and almost all of the competitors in red or yellow? The page does nothing to claim why strict typing is a bad thing.
3. jrGQL is touted as more readable without any explanation as to why. I personally find it way more unreadable, as graphQL comes across largely intuitive to query even without knowledge of it (building performant gql servers is another story). For example, can author really claim that something like:
```
{
"// JSON RegExp Graph Query Language": "",
"name": "jrGQL",
"?[filter]": "",
"search?": ".values$"
}
// is more readable than:
query GetAllTheThingsQuery {
people(name: "GQL", search: "Smith", first: 5) {
name
}
}
```
First off, what are the advantages of regex queries here? One of the major advantages of GraphQL alongside libraries like Relay or Apollo is that there are strict, easy to understand data requirements that are tightly coupled to view logic. I know my server API, why would I want something like this? Especially in considering the regex keys incur a non-trivial performance penalty.
This page comes across misleading or disingenuous at worst:
1. "JrGQL" is listed as a non "new language" even though GraphQL's spec was published before it came out, and has been in use at Facebook since 2012. I'd imagine this is because jrGQL uses JSON. It still requires parsing on top of JSON. I don't know why the author thinks this counts as a non-new language.
2. All of the jrGQL "features" listed in green and almost all of the competitors in red or yellow? The page does nothing to claim why strict typing is a bad thing.
3. jrGQL is touted as more readable without any explanation as to why. I personally find it way more unreadable, as graphQL comes across largely intuitive to query even without knowledge of it (building performant gql servers is another story). For example, can author really claim that something like:
```
{ "// JSON RegExp Graph Query Language": "", "name": "jrGQL", "?[filter]": "", "search?": ".values$" }
// is more readable than: query GetAllTheThingsQuery { people(name: "GQL", search: "Smith", first: 5) { name } } ```