You don't have to use structs tags (nor even structs) to use encoding/json. In fact I often don't as a lot of my usage is with maps rather than structs.
I did some testing with gojay and it did work as a drop in replacement for most of my usage. However the performance improvements I saw in my benchmarks were not nearly as favourable as those published in the projects git repository. I'm sure I could get better results if I played around with their APIs a little more rather than just using the mashallers but frankly the utility I'm using it in favours the flexibility of encoding/json a little more anyway, even if that does cost me a little in performance (and to be clear, it really wasn't much as I needed to iterate the execution of my utility a thousand times just to get any meaningful differences between the two libraries. So we're not talking real world usages).
That said, if you're building high performance servers then I'm sure gojay would really stand out. On reflection (no pun intended), my requirements wasn't really the target use case for this package.
That's fine, but this library isn't a drop-in replacement for encoding/json; to be that, it has to work for people who expect tagged structs to round-trip through it, which won't happen with this library.
That's fine but I never stated "drop in for all use cases". A point I made very clear in my second post. But for some use cases it can be. As I had explained already.
The rest should be abundantly clear which use case would apply to anyone who's spent more than five minutes in Go (or any programming language that supports reflection) and had read the first like of the packages readme (ie that it doesn't use reflection).
It's definitely worth remembering that one doesn't have to use structs and tags to write nor read JSON in Go before people start bitching about boiler plate code and lack of macros.
I did some testing with gojay and it did work as a drop in replacement for most of my usage. However the performance improvements I saw in my benchmarks were not nearly as favourable as those published in the projects git repository. I'm sure I could get better results if I played around with their APIs a little more rather than just using the mashallers but frankly the utility I'm using it in favours the flexibility of encoding/json a little more anyway, even if that does cost me a little in performance (and to be clear, it really wasn't much as I needed to iterate the execution of my utility a thousand times just to get any meaningful differences between the two libraries. So we're not talking real world usages).
That said, if you're building high performance servers then I'm sure gojay would really stand out. On reflection (no pun intended), my requirements wasn't really the target use case for this package.