From: trans <transfire@...>
Date: 2009-09-05T09:59:53+09:00
Subject: Re: Better RDoc Inline Markup



On Sep 4, 3:05 pm, Eric Hodel <drbr...@segment7.net> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2009, at 08:16, Intransition wrote:
>
>
>
> > RDoc's SimpleMarkup  doesn't catch all the cases of  inline markup
> > that is really useful for a Ruby documentation. I think it's checking
> > for \w+ only, but adding some other punctuation marks would be
> > helpful. Namely, none of the following work b/c of punctuation marks:
>
> >  +ActiveRecord::Base+
>
> >  +merge!+
>
> >  +is_a?+
>
> >  +name=+
>
> >  +object.call+
>
> > It would great if the Regexp could be expanded to catch these cases.
>
> Wait, did you even try it?
>
> $ echo '+ActiveRecord::Base+ +merge!+ +is_a?+ +name=+ +object.call+  
> +:symbol+' | rdoc --pipe
> <p>
> +ActiveRecord::Base+ <tt>merge!</tt> <tt>is_a?</tt> <tt>name=</tt>
> <tt>object.call</tt> <tt>:symbol</tt>
> </p>

Hmmm...

  require 'rdoc/markup/simple_markup'
  require 'rdoc/markup/simple_markup/to_html'
  p = SM::SimpleMarkup.new
  h = SM::ToHtml.new
  puts p.convert('+ActiveRecord::Base+ +merge!+ +is_a?+ +name=+
+object.call+ +:symbol+',h)

produces:

  <p>
  +ActiveRecord::Base+ +merge!+ +is_a?+ +name=+ +object.call+ +:symbol
+
  </p>

  require 'rdoc'
  RDoc::VERSION  #=> "2.4.3"

So now I'm thinking RDoc no longer has SM ? And when I require it I am
actually picking up the RDoc built into Ruby 1.8.7, but when I require
'rdoc' I'm getting the latest Gem I installed.