On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 06:55:52PM +0200, Øystein Walle wrote: > > It however theoretically can break an existing use case where the > > user correlates the output with a list of refs they externally > > prepared (e.g. "for-each-ref --format... a b c" shows "A", "", and > > "C", and the user knows "b" produced ""). I do not know how likely > > such users complain, though, and if there is nobody who relies on > > the current behaviour, surely "unconditionally omit" is a very > > tempting approach to take. > > > > Thanks. > > I actually instinctively expected for-each-ref to suppress empty lines, at > least by default. I don't see a good reason for them, except for something > along the lines of what you said. > > We can of course make it a config option along with the flag, then after some > time flip the default, and perhaps ultimately remove the config option again. > Perhaps in a v3 if there is enough interest; will send a v2 shortly. But I > must admit I am not very motivated to follow that up down the line. It might be enough to flip the default unconditionally (no config), but I think we may still want "--no-omit-empty-lines" as an escape hatch. I dunno. Maybe that is somehow choosing the worst of both worlds. -Peff
