From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2010-05-11T08:19:56+09:00
Subject: Re: ri on sqlite

On May 7, 2010, at 02:25, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> On May 6, 1:17 pm, Intransition <transf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What do others think of a creating a new ri tool which uses a SQLite
>> database for storage instead of flat files? I figure doing that would
>> make it easy to create dynamic documentation websites (using ones
>> favorite web framework), not to mention that the ri command line tool
>> should be pretty fast.
> 
> I've thought of it many times, but would never personally undertake
> such a project.
> 
> In addition to hoped-for speed, the motivating factor for me would be
> deeper documentation knowledge.
> 
> For instance, if you do 'ri String' now, you are told about all String
> methods from any library you have installed, as if they were all
> available all the time.  You're not told what you have to "require" to
> get access to the various methods.

You're told which gem the method comes from using RDoc 2.5:

$ ri String
[...]

(from ruby core)
[...]
Instance methods:

  %
  *
  +
[...]
(from gem builder-2.1.2)
[...]
Instance methods:

  to_xs
[...]

> ri's knowledge is static and shallow; the potential exists for it to
> be dynamic and deep.  Or something.
> 
> I haven't really looked at or used ri for some time now, so apologies
> if my comments are outdated.

I've heard from several people that RDoc 2.5's ri output is much improved.  I didn't really work that hard on making it better, though.