From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 04:59:23 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] diff: Make numstat machine friendly also for renames Message-ID: <7vd51azj6c.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <200705081433.58931.jnareb@gmail.com> Jakub Narebski writes: >> The --stat format is for human consumption, and --numstat (be it >> with -z or without) is for machines, so I am not opposed to a >> format change that gives information that is already computed >> but currently is hard to parse. If the format change breaks >> existing scripts, we might want to do --numstat-extended, >> though... >> >> For example, I do not see a reason not to add "R98" in there. >> I.e. >> >> added deleted status TAB "src" (TAB "dst"){0,1} LF >> added deleted status NUL "src" (NUL "dst"){0,1} NUL >> >> where the dst path is present only when status says it is a >> rename/copy, just like the --raw format. > > That is a good idea, but wouldn't it break existing scripts? Well, > break more than a bit hacky idea of using NUL NUL as separator between > pre-image name and post-image name. I think both would break equally. That's why I hinted --numstat-extended, but I think the information is getting to be about --machine-readable, and not necessarily about "stat" anymore.