From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2008-09-27T05:39:51+09:00
Subject: Re: RDoc 2.2.0 released

On Sep 25, 2008, at 18:54 PM, matt neuburg wrote:
> Tony Strauss <tony.strauss@designingpatterns.com> wrote:
>>> Cool, thanks so much for looking into this. I meant to report that  
>>> I'm
>>> not getting superclass information on any classes when I use  
>>> "ri" (and
>>> this has been true for a couple of versions now, I think). I don't  
>>> know
>>> what the expected behavior is here, though.
>
>> I think that we fixed this in RDoc 2.2.1.  In order to see the fix,
>> however, you'll need to rebuild your system's Ruby documentation  
>> (again
>
> Cool! I had some trouble updating the gem, apparently because rubygems
> itself needed updating, but I got it sorted and then followed the
> instructions on the blog (thanks for that). Now when I say
>
> ri File#read
>
> I am told about IO#read. Nice!
>
> I am still not being told, as part of ri's output, who is the  
> superclass
> of the class I'm inquiring about. But maybe that is not part of what  
> ri
> is intended to display? In any case this is a lot better than what I  
> was
> seeing before.
>
> Indeed, it would be nice if the list of known classes were  
> hierarchical
> (class -> subclass).
>
> One other tiny suggestion. It would be nice, perhaps, if there were a
> space after the comma after method names when they are listed. For
> example, I'm seeing
>
> ...next,next!,oct,original_succ...
>
> But it might be more legible as
>
> ...next, next!, oct, original_succ...

Can you file bugs in the tracker?  This way they won't be forgotten.