I feel a little weird about programs doing their own tee, but most command-lines don't make it easy to tee stderr.

Jordan, I was thinking you could specify a path and all parseable output would go there and not to stderr. I'm not sure it would need to go to both file and stderr, would it?

That was Keith's description. I agree that just rerouting to a file would be much easier (and there's no reason that file couldn't be a pipe if someone wanted to do clever Unixy things).

I think what Keith may have meant is parseable output to file, and then using stdout/stderr for normal ("unparseable") output. In that way, you'd still see diagnostics come through the normal way, presumably for a human to read, with the full parseable info available separately to tools.

Yes my original suggestion was what @kastiglione said, parseable output to a file "normal" (non-parseable) output to stderr as if you don't pass `-parseable-output`

Ahh, okay. I'm not sure we're currently set up to report things both ways but I see no reason why it wouldn't work.