RDoc now does constants

[Dave Thomas]

I've added experimental support for documenting constants to RDoc. Right
now it's only in the CVS version, and only the default HTML template
makes use of the data when generating output.

I'd be interested in any feedback


Cheers


Dave

 

[Hal E. Fulton]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Thomas" <[email protected]>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 12:19 PM
Subject: RDoc now does constants

I've added experimental support for documenting constants to RDoc. Right
now it's only in the CVS version, and only the default HTML template
makes use of the data when generating output.

I'd be interested in any feedback

Does this mean that Structs will now be
documented? There was some discussion
of this on irc last night.

Hal

 

[Hal E. Fulton]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Thomas" <[email protected]>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: RDoc now does constants

Hal E. Fulton wrote:




You could do something like:

# A Person is used to hold information on
# interested parties.
# name: the person's name
# dob: the date of birth (Date)

Person = Struct.newname, :dob)

However, for now I'm not automatically extracting Struct information:
there are too many heuristics involved. I'm also concerned that I don't
promote Structs as first-class classes, simply because when developer's
user Structs they are often not considered to be at the same level as
other classes.

So... I thought that by adding constants I gave us all a chance to
experiment with Structs as well. If it turns out that I need to add
additional support for them too, then I'll do it.

Well, call me crazy, but I sometimes create a Struct
and later (usually as an afterthought) add methods
to it.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with this. Some, though,
will perhaps say I should refactor and make my Structs
into "real" classes.

Hal