From: Yehuda Katz Date: 2009-02-02T03:07:07+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:21719] Re: New documentation system! --000e0cd2de30ee3ea70461df4eda Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One project that has been in the works for a while and shows a lot of promise is YARD. The maintainer got sick a while back but has now returned and is proceeding full-steam-ahead. YARD supports structured docs (@param foo) but also allows for rdoc-style completely unstructured docs if that's your piece of cake. Personally, I find that I prefer rdoc style in application and structured style in languages, libraries, and frameworks. YARD has its own parser, so it would be a worthy replacement for rdoc. -- Yehuda 2009/2/1 Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso > People, > > Look for that: http://docs.python.org/download.html, try to search some > functions/methods in "Quick Search" field (example: bisect, urllib, re...= ). > The search field is missing at ruby, and it's make the job easier. > > The layout of the doc core system is another point. We need to improve th= e > interface, show minus things and be more expressive. > > Note that I'm nothing suggesting solutions, just putting the problems on > the table. If the community shows this demand I'll happy to help improve = it! > > > Regards, > Luiz Vitor. > > > On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 2:42 PM, wrote: > >> Quoting Austin Ziegler : >> >> On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso >>> wrote: >>> >>>> What the Ruby community think about developing a better documentation >>>> system. Something like Python Documentation? >>>> >>> >>> I'm not familiar with "Python Documentation". What exactly do you mean >>> by "documentation system" (that is, what do you feel that Ruby >>> currently offers), and what do you mean by "better" (that is, what do >>> you feel that Ruby currently lacks). >>> >>> -austin >>> -- >>> Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/ >>> * austin@halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/ >>> * austin@zieglers.ca >>> >>> >>> >> I'm not familiar with Python documentation either. And I know we've had >> this discussion before, but I'm a big fan of "literate programming" and >> "reproducible research." >> >> As a "community member", though, I'd expect changes to the "documentatio= n >> system" to be created the same way everything else here is created -- by >> patches, discussions on mailing lists and in IRC, test-driven and >> behavior-driven development, etc. So if the original poster has some ide= as, >> I'd certainly like to see what they are, and how they compare with RDoc = / >> RI. Anybody can start a project on RubyForge or Github, and some project= s >> are appealing enough that developers will gravitate to them. >> >> When I run out of other interesting projects, I might revisit the whole >> "literate programming in Ruby" concept. But the thing is -- what I want = to >> do already exists in the R language because some R community members bui= lt >> it. So there's little incentive for me to actually create something. :) >> >> >> -- >> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky >> >> I've never met a happy clam. In fact, most of them were pretty steamed. >> >> > > > -- > Regards, > > Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso > cel.: (11) 8187-8662 > blog: rubz.org > engineer student at maua.br > > "Posso nunca chegar a ser o melhor engenheiro do mundo, mas tenha certeza > de que eu vou lutar com todas as minhas for=E7as para ser o melhor engenh= eiro > que eu puder ser" > --=20 Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 --000e0cd2de30ee3ea70461df4eda Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One project that has been in the works for a while and shows a lot of promi= se is YARD. The maintainer got sick a while back but has now returned and i= s proceeding full-steam-ahead.

YARD supports structured = docs (@param foo<String>) but also allows for rdoc-style completely u= nstructured docs if that's your piece of cake. Personally, I find that = I prefer rdoc style in application and structured style in languages, libra= ries, and frameworks.

YARD has its own parser, so it would be a worthy replac= ement for rdoc.

-- Yehuda

2009/2/1 Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso <grabber@gmail.com>
People,

Look for that: http://docs.python.or= g/download.html, try to search some functions/methods in "Quick Se= arch" field (example: bisect, urllib, re...). The search field is miss= ing at ruby, and it's make the job easier.

The layout of the doc core system is another point. We need to improve = the interface, show minus things and be more expressive.

Note that I= 'm nothing suggesting solutions, just putting the problems on the table= . If the community shows this demand I'll happy to help improve it!


Regards,
Luiz Vitor.


On Sun, Feb 1, = 2009 at 2:42 PM, <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
Quoting Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com>:

On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso
<grabber@gmail.co= m> wrote:
What the Ruby community think about developing a better documentation
system. Something like Python Documentation?

I'm not familiar with "Python Documentation". What exactly do= you mean
by "documentation system" (that is, what do you feel that Ruby currently offers), and what do you mean by "better" (that is, wha= t do
you feel that Ruby currently lacks).

-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * = halostatue@gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
              * austin@halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/fe= ed/
              * austin@zieglers.ca



I'm not familiar with Python documentation either. And I know we've= had this discussion before, but I'm a big fan of "literate progra= mming" and "reproducible research."

As a "community member", though, I'd expect changes to the &q= uot;documentation system" to be created the same way everything else h= ere is created -- by patches, discussions on mailing lists and in IRC, test= -driven and behavior-driven development, etc. So if the original poster has= some ideas, I'd certainly like to see what they are, and how they comp= are with RDoc / RI. Anybody can start a project on RubyForge or Github, and= some projects are appealing enough that developers will gravitate to them.=

When I run out of other interesting projects, I might revisit the whole &qu= ot;literate programming in Ruby" concept. But the thing is -- what I w= ant to do already exists in the R language because some R community members= built it. So there's little incentive for me to actually create someth= ing. :)


--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

I've never met a happy clam. In fact, most of them were pretty steamed.=







--
Yehuda Katz=
Developer | Engine Yard
(ph) 718.877.1325
--000e0cd2de30ee3ea70461df4eda--