Re: [PATCH/RFC] diff: Make numstat machine friendly also for renames

Jakub Narebski [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

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.