Pádraig Brady wrote: ... >> df --printf="%U\0%s\0%m\0\n" >> >> As already said, this would be a greater change in df.c, >> but some code could surely be shared with stat.c and maybe >> in future with "ls --format=..." ;-) >> >> I'm not against --output, but the advantage of a more >> flexible --printf is unbeatable IMO. > > 60:40 for --output as ordering/selection is needed by some > 40:60 against --printf as detailed formatting is neede by few
At first I was going to say I'm 50:50, but as I wrote, the balance tipped in favor of --output, maybe even to 70:30. A big factor for me was that here we want a column-selecting option, rather than a true printf-like format-specifying option. Of course we could augment the format-specifying option with semantics that delimit columns and that allow us to specify alternate formatting/units per column, but that would be something new. The simpler column-selecting facility (like that of say, ps) seems attractive. While added flexibility of --printf=FMT would be nice, it seems like it would come at a price (more code and more complexity), and as Pádraig says, in df the feature might not be used enough to justify the expense. A point in --printf's favor is consistency with stat's option name and the someday-in-ls option name. I prefer --printf over --format because in stat, --format always evokes a trailing newline. However, it is hard to judge without seeing the actual changes. If you feel strongly about it, go ahead and implement your preference. Maybe the resulting code will be small and clean enough that the added flexibility will be an obvious net gain.
