Re: RubySpec link-up with RubyDoc

James Britt wrote:
> Hugh Sasse wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> >
> > > For those of you who don't know, RubySpec is a MediaWiki-based 
> > > attempt of mine
> > > to get community members to work together building a Ruby 
> > > specification. I
> > > figure this is the only real way we're going to get to a complete 
> > > spec, and it
> > > would additionally provide a comprehensive online reference for the 
> > > language
> > > itself.
> > >
> > > Ruby-Doc does a great job of documenting what the Ruby developers 
> > > have been
> > > able to document, but it doesn't comprise a spec. Specifically, 
> > > deeper details
> >         [...]
> >
> > There is some effort, possibly more than one, to revive rubicon as a
> > comprehensive test suite, "proving" the assertions made in the 
> > specification
> > and documentation.  Is there some way of tying these two together, at 
> > least so that the spec refers to the tests?
Yes, actually, that's my other big effort. For the moment, we've annexed 
the Rubicon tests into the JRuby repo to clean them up. That effort is 
mostly complete, so we'll be releasing them back into the wild soon. 
We've also already contributed most of our tests to the RubyTests 
project on RubyForge, though we need to update those as well. All told 
we're currently running four different test suites against JRuby, not 
counting Rails: MRI's tests, zenspider's BFTS (or at least, some older 
copy of it), Rubicon, and our own suite. Really, they all ought to be in 
the same place for everyone to use.
> I've not used MediaWiki, but my understanding is that is quite a 
> full-featured tool.    Certainly more so than the wiki that comes with 
> Trac.  But  using Trac means having an easy, built-in way to link wiki 
> content to items in a code repo.
MediaWiki has a way of defining custom namespaces, so I could just make 
[[Some text about test/unit | rubysvn:src/test/unit]] work. 
Full-featured is right...I'd love to see an equivalent in Ruby, but the 
MediaWiki guys have done a lot of great work. Too bad it's in PHP.
> It would be nice to have a way for a spec to refer to test code designed 
> to verify if a given Ruby implementation provides the correct behavior.
> But if test code is neatly partitioned, then a simple svn:// link in any 
> document might work just as well.
Actually the svn link isn't a bad idea, though I really, really wish 
that RubyForge had a DAV hookup for SVN too (so we could just http:// 
link to the source...not everyone has SVN or has those ports open)...
- Charlie