Download Firefox: WindowsMac OS X
logo       
Google Custom Search
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Re: Could Ruby-doc be better? -- Proposal for a better system.: msg#00012

Subject: Re: Could Ruby-doc be better? -- Proposal for a better system.
Lothar Scholz wrote:
...
No what i was thinking about is that if i do a "gem install foobar" i
want have rdoc and ri to contain documentation for foobar. If foobar
adds a method "String::foobars_great_string_method" then i want this
to be shown in the ri help (even if the file is not currently required
it does exist in the known ruby universe).

If i do a "gem uninstall foobar" i want that this method disapperas.


This is a tricky thing,  though, with the current state of ri.
I've accidently hosed by ri data files by running rdoc over the std lib or on independent libraries.

And if I were looking for String methods, I'd want an easy way to show or hide the extended methods.


Look at the gems list there are many gems where the only purpose is to
add convenient methods to existing (kernel) classes. In this case my
wish/requirement seems to be more understandable.

Very true; it's hard to make full use of such libraries when there is no really good way to look up optional methods through ri.




James




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>