[#1263] Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

33 messages 2000/02/08

[#1376] Re: Scripting versus programming — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>

Conrad writes:

13 messages 2000/02/15

[#1508] Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...>

17 messages 2000/02/19
[#1544] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/02/23

Hello Ian,

[#1550] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...> 2000/02/23

On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 02:56:10AM -0500, Yasushi Shoji wrote:

[#1516] Ruby: PLEASE use comp.lang.misc for all Ruby programming/technical questions/discussions!!!! — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>

((FYI: This was sent to the Ruby mail list.))

10 messages 2000/02/19

[#1569] Re: Ruby: constructors, new and initialise — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article

12 messages 2000/02/25

[ruby-talk:01549] rdtool documentation for library modules

From: Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
Date: 2000-02-23 21:05:48 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1549
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to comp.lang.misc as well.


Has rdtool matured sufficiently that it has been agreed what the
section headings would be when documenting a library module? I saw
that Tempfile has rd documentation--is that in the correct format?

The reason I ask is that right now I'm documenting the library modules
for the book. If people want, I could transfer this same documentation
to the actual library source files in rd format, killing two birds
with one stone. If that sounds like a good idea, I just need to know
what format to use.

Regards

Dave

In This Thread

Prev Next