Re: RDoc + irb (Was: Fix e2mmap.rb for 1.9)

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Dave Thomas wrote:

> 
> On Dec 13, 2007, at 2:01 AM, Martin Duerst wrote:
> 
> > While we are discussing RDoc, I'd like to take the chance and bring
> > up a point that always has bothered me: RDoc uses frames in a way
        [...]
> 
> I agree 100%. The intent with RDoc was to produce something quickly as a way
> of extracting back out all the documentation that I'd added to the Ruby
> source. It was never intended to survive this long--I was hoping that others
> would throw up their hands in disgust and replace both the front and back
> ends.  [...]

When I've looked into rdoc, hoping to be able to modify it to
improve the accessibility of the output, at least for my needs, I've
found it difficult to see the wood for the trees, i.e. to get a
clear idea of how the components fit together.  This is even knowing
that the HTML generator is viewed as a component.  [I think this
says more about me than the code!]  So could I ask the following?

  Do you have any notes (even pencil that you could scan?) that
  would help people get their heads around the structure?

  Do you have any suggestions about how we can break the creation
  of a replacement up into small steps?  Having tackled the problem
  of the original design you may have insights that would be useful.
  
  Is there anything you'd do differently now, (so we don't copy that
  aspect of the design)?

Thank you,
        Hugh