[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

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

Eric Hodel

1/29/2009 1:23:00 AM

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.ruby...

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.=
52 Answers

Joel VanderWerf

1/29/2009 3:30:00 AM

0

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.ruby...

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

Mike Gold

1/29/2009 3:44:00 AM

0

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.ruby...
>
> 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-....

Michael Fellinger

1/29/2009 4:49:00 AM

0

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> 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.ruby...

It has a nice validate link, but seems like it got errors:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Frdoc.rubyfo...

^ manveru

Martin DeMello

1/29/2009 11:24:00 AM

0

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> 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.ruby...

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

Eric Hodel

1/29/2009 3:44:00 PM

0

On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <martindemello@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net>
> 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.ruby...
>
> 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

Martin DeMello

1/29/2009 4:28:00 PM

0

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <martindemello@gmail.com> 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

Gregory Brown

1/29/2009 6:02:00 PM

0

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Martin DeMello
<martindemello@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <martindemello@gmail.com> 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/p...

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

-greg


--
Technical Blaag at: http://blog.majesticseacr...
Non-tech stuff at: http://metametta.bl...
"Ruby Best Practices" Book now in O'Reilly Roughcuts:
http://rubybestpra...

Eric Hodel

1/30/2009 3:29:00 AM

0

On Jan 29, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Gregory Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Martin DeMello
> <martindemello@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net>
>> wrote:
>>> On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:24, Martin DeMello <martindemello@gmail.com>
>>> 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/p...
>
> 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

Clifford Heath

1/30/2009 11:25:00 AM

0

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.

Trans

1/30/2009 1:19:00 PM

0

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.ruby...
>
> 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-....