On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:39:21PM +0200, Christian Couder wrote: > > If you prefer the normalized form (and the input was line-broken in a > > way that you don't like), then this would convert to your preferred > > form. I agree that you could potentially want the opposite (folding long > > lines). Perhaps something like --wrap=72. > > Related to this, I wonder if people might want to "normalize" in > different ways later. If that happens, we might regret having called > this option "--normalize" instead of "--one-per-line" for example. My assumption was that it would be OK to add other normalization later if it brings us closer to the "key: value" form as a standard, and it could fall under "--normalize", since that's what callers would want. And that's why I didn't want to call it something like --one-per-line. But if you are arguing that there can be many "standards" to normalize to, I agree that's a possibility. I think we have an out by extending to "--normalize=whatever-form" in the future. -Peff
