From: Michael Fellinger <m.fellinger@...>
Date: 2006-03-19T16:21:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Core lib clean-up

Well, rdoc has serious problems distinguishing what is core and whatis stdlib... have a look around in the core-docs - everytime a moduleis in the stdlib and will be included into a class of the core itautomatically ends up in the core-documentation as well (YAML isanother example for that).However, rdoc is not able to handle that yet - there was a projecti've been working on (called rdog, one can find it at rubyforge) whichwas intended to solve that problem but i never had the time tocontinue it :|it has a modified version of rdoc that is much more aware of its tieswithin the source and knows about superclasses and mixins. Maybe therdoc-team could use the changes and do something with them, i reallythink rdoc needs some improvements and it has not really been touchedsince 2002 afaik...
~~~~manveru
On 3/19/06, James Britt <james_b@neurogami.com> wrote:> James Edward Gray II wrote:> > On Mar 18, 2006, at 7:59 PM, James Britt wrote:> >> >> Trans wrote:> >>> >>>> Which is a standard library, not a core class.  It shouldn't be in> >>>> those docs at all.> >>>> >>> Thanks. So there are some issue with the docs themselves.> >>> >>> >> One being that people have to know whether something is 'core' or> >> 'stdlib' when they look for it.> >> >> > I offered my best idea for an improvement to this some time ago on  the> > Ruby Documentation list.  Did you not feel building an index page> > grouped by functionality held any value James?>> Please correct me if my recollection is off, but that would have been a> manual process, no?  (My apologies if there was a more direct solution> and I let it slip off my radar.)>> Maintaining doc indices by hand is not really what I would encourage.>> (Or else it's Yet Another Task Automation Challenge: parse the core +> stdlb index files and merge them to create a master index.  Wish I had> the time.)>> When building Ruby with the " --include-docs" option, all the core &> stdlib rdocs should get generated as one set, and ri populated with the> full set of data, and the entries annotated to indicate core or not> (though the docs themselves really should be clear on what exactly one> would need to 'require' to use the code).   (On a side note, sort of a> shame that docs are not installed by default.)>> This may be possible (to some extent) after the installation is complete> by running "rdoc --merge" over the full source tree, though the last> time I tried that (a few months ago, I think) it quickly raised an error> and quit.   (My experiment may have lacked rigor; if anyone has specific> instructions on how to do this safely, with no risk of screwing my> system or site ri files, please let me know.)>>>>> --> James Britt>> http://web2.0validator.com    - We're the Dot in Web 2.0> http://refreshingcities.org   - Design, technology, usability> http://yourelevatorpitch.com  - Finding Business Focus> http://www.jamesbritt.com     - Playing with Better Toys>>