From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2009-04-06T14:36:01+09:00
Subject: Re: rdoc question: C v Ruby

On Apr 4, 2009, at 12:28, Sven C. Koehler wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 05:31:54AM +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 2009, at 06:10, Sven C. Koehler wrote:
>>> I have one class that gets defined in C and has some methods which
>>> were
>>> easier to write in Ruby (so there's rbmodule.c and module.rb, which
>>> extends the class with some methods) .  I've documented both the
>>> methods
>>> in C and the ones in Ruby (including a general explanation of the
>>> class).
>>> When I run rdoc, however, it only uses the inline documentation from
>>> the
>>> C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of
>>> the
>>> class.  Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?
>>
>> This is correct.  Which RDoc are you using?  The latest is 2.4.3.
>
> I am using RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108, which seems to be the version that
> comes with ruby 1.8.6.  Would separating the documentation into an  
> extra
> file, like modulename.rdoc, work better with older rdoc versions like
> this one?

Installing the latest RDoc would be the best solution.  RDoc 1.x is  
unmaintained, and nearly unmaintainable.