Hello out there,
I have a lot of get/set methods that take some complex data structure.
They behave like attributes. Now I would like to use rdoc
so that these methods appear in the attributes section (just like the
ones created with attr_accessor et al.) but are not defined with
attr_accessor, because Ruby gives me lots of warnings about redefining
the method.
So now I have:
class Foo
# Bar is very important
attr_accessor :bar
# Baz is crazy
attr_accessor :baz
def bar= (obj) #:nodoc:
...
end
def bar #:nodoc:
# calculate
return @complex_data_structure
end
def baz= (obj) #:nodoc:
...
end
def baz #:nodoc:
...
end
end
Running rdoc gives me something like
Attributes
···
-----------
bar [RW] Bar is very important
baz [RW] Baz is crazy
which is exactly what I want, but I would like to avoid creating dummy
methods with attr_accessor for some of the attributes. How can I tell
rdoc to write my methods as attributes? Or perhaps to tell ruby to
ignore those attr_accessor calls? =begin =end does not seem to work
(rdoc refuses to go through that section). Same with "if false ....
end".
Patrick
Hello Patrick,
ones created with attr_accessor et al.) but are not defined with
attr_accessor, because Ruby gives me lots of warnings about redefining
the method.
So now I have:
class Foo
# Bar is very important
attr_accessor :bar
# Baz is crazy
attr_accessor :baz
Add a "$VERBOSE = false" here
def bar= (obj) #:nodoc:
...
end
def bar #:nodoc:
# calculate
return @complex_data_structure
end
def baz= (obj) #:nodoc:
...
end
def baz #:nodoc:
...
end
end
And a "$VERBOSE = true" here.
Maybe save value in another global variable like $OLD_VERBOSE and
restore from there.
This hides the duplication messages. Don't know about another
solution. Maybe in the future we can add the disabling of individual
warnings as we can in every C compiler.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Patrick Gundlach wrote:
Hello out there,
I have a lot of get/set methods that take some complex data structure.
They behave like attributes. Now I would like to use rdoc
so that these methods appear in the attributes section (just like the
ones created with attr_accessor et al.) but are not defined with
attr_accessor, because Ruby gives me lots of warnings about redefining
the method.
$ rdoc -A documented_accessor=RW
$ cat accessors.rb
class Foo
def self.documented_accessor(*args); end
# Bar is very important
documented_accessor :bar
# Baz is crazy
documented_accessor :baz
def bar= (obj) #:nodoc:
end
def bar #:nodoc:
# calculate
return @complex_data_structure
end
def baz= (obj) #:nodoc:
end
def baz #:nodoc:
end
end
And this produces exactly the output you want:
···
Attributes
-----------
bar [RW] Bar is very important
baz [RW] Baz is crazy
Joel VanderWerf wrote:
$ rdoc -A documented_accessor=RW
On second thought, maybe calling this class method
"document_as_accessor" would be nicer. The name can be anything you
want, as long as it doesn't conflict with other class methods.
[...]
$ rdoc -A documented_as_accessor=RW
def self.documented_as_accessor(*args); end
# Bar is very important
documented_as_accessor :bar
Yes, that rocks! Thanks Joel,
Patrick
Hello Patrick,
[...]
$ rdoc -A documented_as_accessor=RW
def self.documented_as_accessor(*args); end
# Bar is very important
documented_as_accessor :bar
Yes, that rocks! Thanks Joel,
Dammed, and it makes the life for tool writers much much harder.
I really hate this ruby hacks. So there is no standard way to generate
rdoc - this is far from good. Not everything that works is a well engineered
solution.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Lothar Scholz wrote:
Hello Patrick,
> [...]
$ rdoc -A documented_as_accessor=RW
def self.documented_as_accessor(*args); end
# Bar is very important
documented_as_accessor :bar
> Yes, that rocks! Thanks Joel,
Dammed, and it makes the life for tool writers much much harder.
I really hate this ruby hacks. So there is no standard way to generate
rdoc - this is far from good. Not everything that works is a well engineered
solution.
Why do you care _how_ the rdoc is generated? Can't you let rdoc do its
thing, generating to ri format, and load the resulting yaml? (Or maybe
even use the rdoc api.)
I probably don't understand what kind of tool functionality you have in
mind.
Hello Joel,
Why do you care _how_ the rdoc is generated? Can't you let rdoc do its
thing, generating to ri format, and load the resulting yaml? (Or maybe
even use the rdoc api.)
I probably don't understand what kind of tool functionality you have in
mind.
I'm working on RI/RDOC integration for the last two month. So this is just
a point that makes some of my ideas questionable.
First the good news, there is no problem when you use RubyGems. In the
Gem specification you can define how rdoc should be called for a gem.
But i see two problems:
a) how should a navigation tool window in an editor find out what
are attributes if this can be differently defined (possible different
for each file) ? It's already only possible based on heuristics but with
"attr_accessor" this works fine in most cases.
This is a problem for Eclipse, FreeRide and ArachnoRuby and i think also for
other editors like Zeus that use ctags.
b) in ArachnoRuby you can simply add a library to the project file
manager. Then the source directory tree appears in the file browser.
As the RI database must be defined on a project level (i explained
this in earlier posts) the RI data must be generated at this time.
But this is not longer possible as it is unkown how to do this.
One method to fix it is to add one more configuration option,
but this is not really what people want to see, they want something that
works out of the box. At least for this basic features and i think
RI/RDOC is a basic feature.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
not directly related to your post, but anyway:
I'd wish that rdoc supports some dummy section such as
if false
# doc for foo
attr_accessor :foo
# doc for bar
def bar
end
so that ruby does not look at it, but rdoc does. This would make my
life more easy 
Patrick
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?atid=2475&group_id=627&func=browse
Is where to put it.
···
On 12 Jul 2005, at 02:05, Patrick Gundlach wrote:
not directly related to your post, but anyway:
I'd wish that rdoc supports some dummy section such as
if false
# doc for foo
attr_accessor :foo
# doc for bar
def bar
end
so that ruby does not look at it, but rdoc does. This would make my
life more easy 
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
Hello Eric,
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?atid=2475&group_id=627&func=browse
Is where to put it.
Thanks for the pointer, it is there now.
Patrick
