From: Jeremy McAnally <jeremymcanally@...>
Date: 2007-11-28T06:48:12+09:00
Subject: Re: So, here's a challenge! (was: Re: "Why I Program In Ruby (And Maybe Why You Shouldn't)")

There is such a tool that I spent all summer writing, but very few
people use it. :)

It's called dcov (rcov for documentation).

http://dcov.rubyforge.org

Of course, ironically, it's poorly documented, but you can still use
it just with little customization.

--Jeremy

On Nov 27, 2007 3:04 AM, Jari Williamsson
<jari.williamsson@mailbox.swipnet.se> wrote:
> Trollen Lord wrote:
> > Still. The whole pile of "documentation" is like that. Unfriendly
> > and plain useless.
>
> I agree with lots of what you said, and I think much of it can be
> because many might think of Ruby as a way to cut corners?
>
> Why are there so few projects on Rubyforge that leave their alpha/beta
> stages to Production/Stable? Why are there so few libs with really good
> documentation? Why is there not even good documentation on how to create
> a Gem or maintaining it with Hoe? Why are there so few documentation
> packages that use anything other than the old frame-based default
> template? And so on.
>
> Anyway:
> Is there a utility that analyzes the data that RDoc is processing for
> documentation (or analyze the result)? It should scan for methods with
> missing documentation, methods with missing examples, count
> cross-references, etc, etc. If not, this is the challenge: to create
> such a utility!
> Developers should get help to spot weak documentation and it should be
> possible to rate one's documentation and be able to say things like
> "Documentation gets a 97% quality rating by <name of utility>"
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jari Williamsson
>
>



-- 
http://www.jeremymcanally.com/

My books:
Ruby in Practice
http://www.manning.com/mcanally/

My free Ruby e-book
http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/

My blogs:
http://www.mrneighborly.com/
http://www.rubyinpractice.com/