From: Dan Drew <dan@...>
Date: 2010-04-15T03:13:52+09:00
Subject: Re: OT(?): Adapting rdoc to produce documentation for something other than ruby or c--advisable?

------=_NextPart_000_00A4_01CADBDC.6947C640
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Roy,

I did some customizing of rdoc for my web site, rubydox.net. In my case =
I wanted to override the default rdoc -> html formatting as well has the =
final object model -> file output. I have played with the source file =
parsing, but rdoc already has a number of file parsers for different =
file types (ruby, plain text, etc). You'll probably have to use a mixin =
like I did to hook your code in but it should be possible.

Dah
dan drew > brilliantsoftware.ca > shouldn't your software be brilliant?=20


From: rpardee@gmail.com=20
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 12:00 PM
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: ruby-talk ML=20
Subject: OT(?): Adapting rdoc to produce documentation for something =
other than ruby or c--advisable?


Hey All,

In my day job I'm a sas (www.sas.com) programmer.  I've got a plain
text file of sas macros (roughly equivalent to ruby's methods) for
which I would love to have rdoc-style documentation.  Specifically,
I'd like a list of the macros, the params they take, the explanatory
comments that precede each one & the expandable code listing when you
click a method name.

A brief troll through the RDoc::Markup docs makes me wonder if I
couldn't learn to drive that sufficiently to get rdoc to do this for
me.

Can anybody give me a sense for how badly RDoc & I would have to
torture one another to get this to work?

In case it's helpful, sas has c-style comments: '*' starts a comment
until the first following ';' char.  Macro definitions are preceded by
the keyword %macro, followed by a name & an optional parenthesized,
comma-delimited list of paraameters.  All lines up to the first
following %mend keyword are the body of the macro.

Many thanks!

-Roy


------=_NextPart_000_00A4_01CADBDC.6947C640--