Fixed pluralization in diff reports

I got irritated by the

	 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

lack of pluralization so I fixed it. Now it says

	 1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

and so forth.

---
 diff.c |   10 ++++++----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletion(-)

index 93ef9a2..a179b24 100644
@@ -1465,8 +1465,9 @@ static void show_stats(struct diffstat_t *data, struct diff_options *options)
 	}
 	fprintf(options->file, "%s", line_prefix);
 	fprintf(options->file,
-	       " %d files changed, %d insertions(+), %d deletions(-)\n",
-	       total_files, adds, dels);
+	       " %d file%s changed, %d insertion%s(+), %d deletion%s(-)\n",
+	       total_files, total_files == 1 ? "" : "s", adds, adds == 1 ? "" : "s", dels,
+		dels == 1 ? "" : "s");
 }
 
 static void show_shortstats(struct diffstat_t *data, struct 

diff_options *options)
@@ -1496,8 +1497,9 @@ static void show_shortstats(struct diffstat_t *data, struct diff_options *option
options->output_prefix_data);
fprintf(options->file, "%s", msg->buf);
}
- fprintf(options->file, " %d files changed, %d insertions(+), %d deletions(-)\n",
- total_files, adds, dels);
+ fprintf(options->file, " %d file%s changed, %d insertion%s(+), %d deletion%s(-)\n",
+ total_files, total_files == 1 ? "" : "s", adds, adds == 1 ? "" : "s", dels,
+ dels == 1 ? "" : "s");
}

static void show_numstat(struct diffstat_t *data, struct diff_options
*options)
-- 1.7.6.347.g4db0d.dirty

This is how the other diff implementation has always showed this line, no?

Maybe, but it's not grammatical English no matter who does it.

But, I'm in the process of asking you to disregard this change because I noticed that the diff of my change to diff.c was

	1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletion(-)

The last part is clearly wrong, but I don't see why my change didn't work. It's such a simple change.

Back to the drawing board.

Sorry for the bother.

Jon

It does not matter it is grammatical or not; changing it would break expectation by scripts that are used to the output both by the other implementation and by us.

I see your point. I agree that this change isn't important enough to disturb so many things. I didn't realize this would happen.

Sorry,
Jon