On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 13:34:59 -0700 (PDT), Jakub Narebski
<jnareb@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Julian Phillips <julian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 11:16:18 -0700, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> Julian Phillips <julian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> Add a library that allows commands to produce structured output in
any
>>>> of a range of formats using a single API.
>>>>
>>>> The API includes an OPT_OUTPUT and handle_output_arg so that the
>>>> option handling for different commands will be as similar as
possible.
>>>
>>> I was hoping that the existing low-level -z routines (e.g. "diff-*
-z")
>>> follow similar enough patterns to have a corresponding output-z.c and
be
>>> handled inside output.c library. But that is not a requirement, just
>>> "would have been nicer if the original were written that way".
>>
>> As the API currently stands, I don't think it would be possible to
>> recreate the existing output of -z, as the separator between values is
>> not
>> constant. I haven't really looked into whether the output is
completely
>> incompatible with structured output though (i.e. could -z be supported
by
>> adding one or two functions to the API?).
>
> What about the new(ly) proposed -Z output in one of its variants,
> namely with single NUL ("\0") as field separator, and double NUL
("\0\0")
> as a record terminator?
That should be much easier. Though actually I am fairly close to getting
_all_ output from ls-tree going through the output library ... (i.e. even
the normal no-option output). I don't know what people's opinion on this
approach is, but I thought it was worth a try anyway.
--
Julian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html