Re: RFC: null-terminated separators for rlog

"Jonathan Noack" <[email protected]> writes:

> The purpose of this option is not to present output for human
> consumption; rather, it is to allow scripts/programs to parse the
> output.

But you also mentioned that you wanted to be able to put rlog output into
rlog entries, which means you need a general quoting mechanism.

Let's put it another way.  There is nothing in the current spec that
prevents NUL bytes from being in rlog output.  The current RCS
commands let you put NUL bytes there.  So, merely outputting a single
NUL byte at the end of each log entry will not suffice, in general, to
let programs disambiguate the output.  You need a more-general way
whereby rlog can represent arbitary data in the rlog entry, while
still being parsable.