RDoc 2.3 now with Darkfish, without CHM and extra HTML templates

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Eric Hodel, Jan 29, 2009.

  1. Eric Hodel

    Eric Hodel Guest

    This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael =20
    Granger=92s Darkfish generator has become the default output format for =20=

    RDoc! Michael put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite =20
    lovely. Check out the RDoc documentation for a sample:

    http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/

    rdoc_chm and rdoc_html_templates have been split off from RDoc and =20
    released separately as unmaintained software. I don=92t plan to make any =
    =20
    future changes or updates to rdoc_html_templates (which are for the =20
    old HTML generator) ever, but somebody may be interested in taking =20
    over maintainership of the rdoc_chm generator.

    rdoc will automatically detect rdoc_html_templates and rdoc_chm, so =20
    you only need to install them to make them usable via command-line =20
    options.=
    Eric Hodel, Jan 29, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Eric Hodel wrote:
    > This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael
    > Granger’s Darkfish generator has become the default output format for
    > RDoc! Michael put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite
    > lovely. Check out the RDoc documentation for a sample:
    >
    > http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/


    It does look nice, except for source code display. The bg color is gray,
    and so fg cyan/orange do not display well. Is this the default? Is it
    changeable?

    --
    vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
    Joel VanderWerf, Jan 29, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Eric Hodel

    Mike Gold Guest

    Joel VanderWerf wrote:
    > Eric Hodel wrote:
    >> This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael
    >> Granger�s Darkfish generator has become the default output format for
    >> RDoc! Michael put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite
    >> lovely. Check out the RDoc documentation for a sample:
    >>
    >> http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/

    >
    > It does look nice, except for source code display. The bg color is gray,
    > and so fg cyan/orange do not display well. Is this the default? Is it
    > changeable?


    I appreciate the effort, it's just the colors do seem odd. The
    pea-green on top of the gray is difficult to read, and may even be
    uglier than congressman Henry Waxman. Please consider changing the
    default colors.
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    Mike Gold, Jan 29, 2009
    #3
  4. On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Eric Hodel <> wrote:
    > This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael Granger's
    > Darkfish generator has become the default output format for RDoc! Michael
    > put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite lovely. Check out the
    > RDoc documentation for a sample:
    >
    > http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/


    It has a nice validate link, but seems like it got errors:
    http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/

    ^ manveru
    Michael Fellinger, Jan 29, 2009
    #4
  5. On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Eric Hodel <> wrote:
    > This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael Granger's
    > Darkfish generator has become the default output format for RDoc! Michael
    > put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite lovely. Check out the
    > RDoc documentation for a sample:
    >
    > http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/


    The RDoc documentation is a pretty bad sample, since the majority of
    the methods say 'not documented'. I suggest putting a small but
    well-documented project on the site purely to act as a demo.

    martin
    Martin DeMello, Jan 29, 2009
    #5
  6. Eric Hodel

    Eric Hodel Guest

    On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <>
    wrote:

    > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Eric Hodel <>
    > wrote:
    >> This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael
    >> Granger's
    >> Darkfish generator has become the default output format for RDoc!
    >> Michael
    >> put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite lovely. Check
    >> out the
    >> RDoc documentation for a sample:
    >>
    >> http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/

    >
    > The RDoc documentation is a pretty bad sample, since the majority of
    > the methods say 'not documented'. I suggest putting a small but
    > well-documented project on the site purely to act as a demo.


    Patches welcome
    Eric Hodel, Jan 29, 2009
    #6
  7. On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Eric Hodel <> wrote:
    > On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <> wrote:
    >>
    >> The RDoc documentation is a pretty bad sample, since the majority of
    >> the methods say 'not documented'. I suggest putting a small but
    >> well-documented project on the site purely to act as a demo.

    >
    > Patches welcome


    Will sift rubyforge for candidates. Prawn looks pretty good in terms
    of coverage, though perhaps something smaller would be better.

    martin
    Martin DeMello, Jan 29, 2009
    #7
  8. On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Martin DeMello
    <> wrote:
    > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Eric Hodel <> wrote:
    >> On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> The RDoc documentation is a pretty bad sample, since the majority of
    >>> the methods say 'not documented'. I suggest putting a small but
    >>> well-documented project on the site purely to act as a demo.

    >>
    >> Patches welcome

    >
    > Will sift rubyforge for candidates. Prawn looks pretty good in terms
    > of coverage, though perhaps something smaller would be better.


    Now that prawn has been split out into various extensions, prawn-core
    isn't too bad.
    http://prawn.majesticseacreature.com/docs/prawn-core/

    I'll probably give the latest RDoc a try soon, and post here if I do.

    -greg


    --
    Technical Blaag at: http://blog.majesticseacreature.com
    Non-tech stuff at: http://metametta.blogspot.com
    "Ruby Best Practices" Book now in O'Reilly Roughcuts:
    http://rubybestpractices.com
    Gregory Brown, Jan 29, 2009
    #8
  9. Eric Hodel

    Eric Hodel Guest

    On Jan 29, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Gregory Brown wrote:
    > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Martin DeMello
    > <> wrote:
    >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Eric Hodel <>
    >> wrote:
    >>> On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> The RDoc documentation is a pretty bad sample, since the majority
    >>>> of
    >>>> the methods say 'not documented'. I suggest putting a small but
    >>>> well-documented project on the site purely to act as a demo.
    >>>
    >>> Patches welcome

    >>
    >> Will sift rubyforge for candidates. Prawn looks pretty good in terms
    >> of coverage, though perhaps something smaller would be better.

    >
    > Now that prawn has been split out into various extensions, prawn-core
    > isn't too bad.
    > http://prawn.majesticseacreature.com/docs/prawn-core/
    >
    > I'll probably give the latest RDoc a try soon, and post here if I do.


    Oh, you can rebuild all your rdoc on your machine with:

    sudo gem rdoc --all --no-ri
    Eric Hodel, Jan 30, 2009
    #9
  10. Eric Hodel wrote:
    > This release of RDoc brings some big changes.


    Thanks, I think it's an improvement. Still has a way to go IMO, however...

    Has the behavior of #:nodoc: changed? I have *empty* documentation
    for classes where the class definition has #:nodoc:, instead of no
    documentation... If this is a change, I think it's an error.

    I'd like to see the class index above the file index - I rarely find
    the file index useful and almost always use the class index.

    Clifford Heath.
    Clifford Heath, Jan 30, 2009
    #10
  11. Eric Hodel wrote:
    > This release of RDoc brings some big changes. Most notably Michael
    > Granger�s Darkfish generator has become the default output format for
    > RDoc! Michael put a ton of great work into this, and it looks quite
    > lovely. Check out the RDoc documentation for a sample:
    >
    > http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/
    >
    > rdoc_chm and rdoc_html_templates have been split off from RDoc and
    > released separately as unmaintained software. I don�t plan to make any
    > future changes or updates to rdoc_html_templates (which are for the
    > old HTML generator) ever, but somebody may be interested in taking
    > over maintainership of the rdoc_chm generator.
    >
    > rdoc will automatically detect rdoc_html_templates and rdoc_chm, so
    > you only need to install them to make them usable via command-line
    > options.


    (Sigh. the Google Group mirror is acting up again, so i will be replying
    to this for the third time.)

    My concern is for the loss of the sidebars. While I know frames are out
    of fashion, having a sidebar was very convenient. Where as scrolling to
    the bottom of a page is not.

    Also, I think it would be nice if RDoc offered a few template options,
    varying up the layout, suitable to variant preferences and/or project
    needs, eg. small projects versus large ones.

    Finally, what is the state of creating custom templates? Are we using
    rhtml now? Is their a tutorial anywhere on the topic?

    Thanks,
    T.
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    Thomas Sawyer, Jan 30, 2009
    #11
  12. Eric Hodel

    James Gray Guest

    On Jan 30, 2009, at 5:27 AM, Clifford Heath wrote:

    > I'd like to see the class index above the file index - I rarely find
    > the file index useful and almost always use the class index.


    I whole heartedly agree with that.

    James Edward Gray II
    James Gray, Jan 30, 2009
    #12
  13. James Gray wrote:
    > On Jan 30, 2009, at 5:27 AM, Clifford Heath wrote:
    >
    >> I'd like to see the class index above the file index - I rarely find
    >> the file index useful and almost always use the class index.

    >
    > I whole heartedly agree with that.


    How could anyone NOT agree? Since the file page often contains nothing.
    And if it does contain anything it is usually redundant information.

    I've been meaning to make this suggestion for a while now: Would it not
    be more useful if the file page showed the entire file's contents
    verbatim? This is one thing that in my mind is missing from RDoc --a way
    to look at the source in full.

    T.
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    Thomas Sawyer, Jan 30, 2009
    #13
  14. On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Thomas Sawyer <> wrote:

    > I've been meaning to make this suggestion for a while now: Would it not
    > be more useful if the file page showed the entire file's contents
    > verbatim? This is one thing that in my mind is missing from RDoc --a way
    > to look at the source in full.


    Oh, that's a very interesting thought. +1

    --
    Technical Blaag at: http://blog.majesticseacreature.com
    Non-tech stuff at: http://metametta.blogspot.com
    "Ruby Best Practices" Book now in O'Reilly Roughcuts:
    http://rubybestpractices.com
    Gregory Brown, Jan 30, 2009
    #14
  15. Eric Hodel

    James Gray Guest

    On Jan 30, 2009, at 8:36 AM, Gregory Brown wrote:

    > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Thomas Sawyer <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I've been meaning to make this suggestion for a while now: Would it
    >> not
    >> be more useful if the file page showed the entire file's contents
    >> verbatim? This is one thing that in my mind is missing from RDoc --
    >> a way
    >> to look at the source in full.

    >
    > Oh, that's a very interesting thought. +1


    Yeah, I agree. That would be nice.

    James Edward Gray II
    James Gray, Jan 30, 2009
    #15
  16. Eric Hodel

    Roger Pack Guest

    Re: RDoc 2.3 now with Darkfish, without CHM and extra HTML t

    It definitely looks better.

    >> I'd like to see the class index above the file index - I rarely find
    >> the file index useful and almost always use the class index.

    >
    > I whole heartedly agree with that.
    >
    > James Edward Gray II



    +1
    I assume that's referring to the leftmost side bars on pages like
    http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/RDoc.html
    ?

    I'd also tend to prefer the class index above the file index on the main
    page [http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/], or the two side by side, at the
    bottom.

    also the links to files like a.png point [in error] to a.png.rhtml

    And when you click on those files, it shows the requires and last
    modified file dates--it would be way nice to display the file itself, as
    well [or is it supposed to?]


    Also a few suggestions:

    the link color could darken a bit to get better contrast--they sometimes
    are a little hard contrast-wise against the background [ex:
    http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/ at the top, if you've never clicked on any of
    the links.]

    Thanks!
    -=r
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    Roger Pack, Jan 30, 2009
    #16
  17. Eric Hodel

    Roger Pack Guest

    Re: RDoc 2.3 now with Darkfish, without CHM and extra HTML t


    >> I've been meaning to make this suggestion for a while now: Would it not
    >> be more useful if the file page showed the entire file's contents
    >> verbatim? This is one thing that in my mind is missing from RDoc --a way
    >> to look at the source in full.

    >
    > Oh, that's a very interesting thought. +1


    +1 for me.

    Also a nice thought would be to be able to "open the full file" from the
    code snippet pop-downs--like a link back to see that method within
    context.

    Thanks for helping out.
    -=r
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    Roger Pack, Jan 30, 2009
    #17
  18. Eric Hodel

    Eric Hodel Guest

    On Jan 30, 2009, at 5:37, James Gray <> wrote:

    > On Jan 30, 2009, at 5:27 AM, Clifford Heath wrote:
    >
    >> I'd like to see the class index above the file index - I rarely find
    >> the file index useful and almost always use the class index.

    >
    > I whole heartedly agree with that.


    Try the quicksearch at the top of the class index
    Eric Hodel, Jan 30, 2009
    #18
  19. The are many linked files that ends up with 404, for example:
    page: http://rdoc.rubyforge.org/
    section FILES: bullet_toggle_minus.png (I think that all .png files
    does not work)


    --=20
    Pozdrawiam

    Rados=B3aw Bu=B3at
    http://radarek.jogger.pl - m=F3j blog
    Rados³aw Bu³at, Jan 30, 2009
    #19
  20. Eric Hodel

    Eric Hodel Guest

    On Jan 30, 2009, at 03:27 AM, Clifford Heath wrote:
    > Eric Hodel wrote:
    >> This release of RDoc brings some big changes.

    >
    > Thanks, I think it's an improvement. Still has a way to go IMO,
    > however...
    >
    > Has the behavior of #:nodoc: changed? I have *empty* documentation
    > for classes where the class definition has #:nodoc:, instead of no
    > documentation... If this is a change, I think it's an error.


    If you don't file a bug it won't get fixed.
    Eric Hodel, Jan 30, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Christian Wilcox

    RE: Help, *.CHM, etc -> *nix .chm viewer

    Christian Wilcox, Jan 21, 2004, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    414
    Markus Wankus
    Jan 21, 2004
  2. Iñaki Baz Castillo

    Does Darkfish-Rdoc work properly?

    Iñaki Baz Castillo, Mar 2, 2009, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    115
    Ryan Davis
    Mar 3, 2009
  3. Iñaki Baz Castillo

    RDoc (Darkfish) not ordering method by name

    Iñaki Baz Castillo, Mar 9, 2009, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    143
    Eric Hodel
    Mar 16, 2009
  4. Iñaki Baz Castillo

    darkfish-rdoc (1.1.5) not working with rdoc (2.4.3)

    Iñaki Baz Castillo, Apr 4, 2009, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    141
    Iñaki Baz Castillo
    Apr 6, 2009
  5. Andre Linoge

    CHM question Maximise the chm file

    Andre Linoge, May 11, 2012, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    634
    Andre Linoge
    May 11, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page