From: Trans Date: 2008-02-20T02:23:49+09:00 Subject: Re: FastRI 0.3.1: faster, Leopard compatibility, etc. On Feb 19, 8:55 am, James Gray wrote: > On Feb 19, 2008, at 4:12 AM, Mauricio Fernandez wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 11:17:52PM +0900, James Gray wrote: > >> On Feb 18, 2008, at 5:53 AM, Mauricio Fernandez wrote: > >>> $ ri -T collect_file > >>> More than one method matched your request. You can refine > >>> your search by asking for information on one of: > > >>> Test::Unit::Collector::Dir#collect_file, > >>> Test::Unit::Collector::Dir#collect_file, > >>> Test::Unit::Collector::Dir#collect_file, > >>> Test::Unit::Collector::Dir#collect_file, > >>> Test::Unit::Collector::Dir#collect_file > > >>> Unfortunately, ri is so slow and buggy that many (me included) > >>> find it > >>> unusable. FastRI is just an usable ri with some extra features > >>> (working > >>> RubyGems support, full-text search, configurable lookup order, > >>> better > >>> search strategies, etc.). > > >> Amen. > > >> We had so many bug reports on TextMate's documentation command when > >> we > >> used ri. We later switched to qri (part of FastRI) and added some > >> documentation about how to install it. Our bug reports are > >> practically gone now. When we do see one, we point them at the > >> install documentation and it solves their problem. > > >> I really don't understand why we don't toss RI in the standard > >> library > >> and replace it with the FastRI code. It's RI with more features, > >> it's > >> faster, oh and it works. What's the downside exactly? > > > It goes against the current trend of moving stuff out of the > > standard library and distributing it as RubyGems packages. > > I understand why we should do that when a standard library really > isn't needed in all cases. However, it doesn't get much more > important than documentation and what ships with Ruby is just broken. > I think it would be so much better to just replace it at this point. +1 I just installed FastRI (been meaning to do it for a while). And I have to say it is MUCH better. Very impressed. The only thing I need now is a way to tell FastRI of alternate locations I want indexed. T.