RDOC: several related modules in several C files

[Victor \Zverok\ Shepelev]

Hi all!

I have a pretty large extension I want to document with RDoc.

The problem is, I have several files:

htmr_main.cpp:
...
rb_mHtmr = rb_define_module("Htmr");
...

htmr_constants.cpp:
==================
...
rb_mHtmrConstants = rb_define_module_under(rb_mHtmr, "Constants");
...

The problem with such organization: RDoc says "Enclosing class/module
'rb_mHtmr' for module Constants not known".

I can:
1. move the line "rb_mHtmr = ..." to htmr_constants.cpp, but rb_mHtmr is
used not only from this file.
2. move the line "rb_mHtmrConstants = ..." to htmr_main.cpp, but in this
case all othre contents of htmr_constants.cpp is ignored by Rdoc.
3. join all files of the extension into one huge file, but it will be ugly


Was I miss something?

Thanks.

V.

 

[Max Lapshin]

The problem with such organization: RDoc says "Enclosing class/module
'rb_mHtmr' for module Constants not known".

I've done the following with my extensions:
while creating documentation, I've concatenated all data in one file and
rdoc is parsing one file.

 

[Max Lapshin]

as in my sources there are many other problems for RDoc, like shortcut
macro

These shortcuts seems to be one of the greatest problem. The only way to
bypass them is to use some sort of C->xml compilers in RDoc (to make it
very complicated), or to create some sort of explicit binding C
functions to ruby methods

 

[Max Lapshin]

BTW, I've found even \t (Tab) symbol in sources confuses RDoc

Yes, RDoc seems to be a rather confusable thing =)
I think, that there is no use in trying to make a perfect RDoc for C
extensions, so You hack is OK. You can also make the following:
preprecess sources before RDoc-ing them. Thus, all You macroses will be
expanded to rb_define_method