Fd: Uniform output format when searching a parent directory

[sharkdp]

(courtesy of @iology in #102)

Consider this directory tree:

> tree
.
├── dir1
│   ├── file1
│   └── file2
└── dir2
    ├── file3
    └── file4

2 directories, 4 files

Now, go to dir1 and perform a search in the parent directory:

> cd dir1
> fd '' ..
.
../dir2
../dir2/file3
../dir2/file4
file1
file2

The results are correct, but it would be more helpful if the output would look like this (in some order):

> cd dir1
> fd '' ..
../dir1
../dir2
../dir2/file3
../dir2/file4
../dir1/file1
../dir1/file2

[Doxterpepper]

How about making this a flag like --tree? That would allow the tree structure when wanted but then it will default to the original output by default. It's often easier to work with the default output when scripting.

[iology]

@Doxterpepper: It's often easier to work with the default output when scripting.

Examples?

[Doxterpepper]

Normally when I'm searching for a file I am intending to do something with it such as edit it with a text editor. If the output is like the original output it is easier to copy and paste into the next command, or to include it in a script to perform some action on each file. A crude example would be:

for file in $(fd 'foo.txt' .)
do
  echo 'some change' >> $file
done  

I think the tree output is great for humans to read, perhaps the tree output could be default unless something like --plain is given. In either case the option for basic output would be good in my opinion.

[iology]

@Doxterpepper I still don't see why you don't want "../dir1/file1" (instead of "file1"), while you still tolerate "../dir2/file3". And to copy/paste "file1" is just a double click.

NOTE: Your example use ".", not "..".

[Doxterpepper]

I think I misunderstood the description, I thought the suggestion was to include tree style output with ascii decorators and all. Disregard my comments above.

[Doxterpepper]

understanding the requirements better now, would anyone oppose me taking this on?

[iology]

No problem, I haven't started on this one.

[iology]

Ooops, while fixing #82, I inadvertently implemented this feature. :P

[sharkdp]

Ooops, while fixing #82, I inadvertently implemented this feature. :P

Sounds good :smile:. Would you like to open a PR for that?

[iology]

Sounds good 😄. Would you like to open a PR for that?

Some superfluous slashes and dots in the output is giving me a headache, #112 only solves part of the problem. (Linux) I need to fix that first. 🤕