Victor 'Zverok' Shepelev
3/16/2007 4:11:00 PM
From: list-bounce@example.com [mailto:list-bounce@example.com] On Behalf Of
Max Lapshin
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:00 PM
>
>
>> 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
>
Aha. I've ended with having something like
//real definition
DEF_METHOD(method, c_method, 1);
#ifdef MAKIN_RDOC_HAPPY // MAKIN_RDOC_HAPPY isn't defined :)
//fake definition
rb_define_method(rb_cMyClass, "method", c_method, 1);
#endif
My DEF_METHOD definitons (even if they are many) looks much more DRY (I have
to write only differing parts of each definition).
BTW, I've found even \t (Tab) symbol in sources confuses RDoc
V.