Ahoy comrades!
I'm thinking about removing support for all
output formats except unified context from
my diff(1) candidate. I want to hear your
opinion.
This means removal of:
-f
ed-like diff-script that cannot be parsed
for patch(1). It is intended to be easier
for humans to read than the -e output, but
to be used for parsing by machines. I think
this is a stupid flag as it will only show
next text in the file not what has been
removed, and there is no context. Making it
less readable than the normal output, copied
context (-c) and unified context (-u).
-e
ed-script. Same problems as -f, except it can
be used for patching. However, because of the
lack of context the file that is being patch
must be identical to the file the patch was
create from. It is functionally inferior to
copied context (-c) and unified context (-u).
(no flag)
Normal output. This is a small set up from -e.
There still is not context and thus functionally
inferior to copied context (-c) and unified
context (-u). It does however show what it being
deleted.
-c
Copied context. Functionalitywise there is no
difference from unified context, accept it is not
as easy to read.
Unified context is also the easiest output to produce.
Additional, I believe the output formats are not
actually used anymore in the real world.
All output formats except unified context would
simplify diff(1) vastly. And I don't see any reason
why diff(1) needs to support multiple formats.
Ex animo
Mattias Andrée
Received on Mon Mar 07 2016 - 12:23:07 CET