Rdoc question: C v Ruby

ruby-talk
1

Hello,

I have one class that gets defined in C and has some methods which were
easier to write in Ruby (so there's rbmodule.c and module.rb, which
extends the class with some methods) . I've documented both the methods
in C and the ones in Ruby (including a general explanation of the class).
When I run rdoc, however, it only uses the inline documentation from the
C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of the
class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?

Best,

Sven

2

This is correct. Which RDoc are you using? The latest is 2.4.3.

···

On Apr 3, 2009, at 06:10, Sven C. Koehler wrote:

I have one class that gets defined in C and has some methods which were
easier to write in Ruby (so there's rbmodule.c and module.rb, which
extends the class with some methods) . I've documented both the methods
in C and the ones in Ruby (including a general explanation of the class).
When I run rdoc, however, it only uses the inline documentation from the
C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of the
class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?

3

I am using RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108, which seems to be the version that
comes with ruby 1.8.6. Would separating the documentation into an extra
file, like modulename.rdoc, work better with older rdoc versions like
this one?

-S.

···

On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 05:31:54AM +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:

On Apr 3, 2009, at 06:10, Sven C. Koehler wrote:

I have one class that gets defined in C and has some methods which
were
easier to write in Ruby (so there's rbmodule.c and module.rb, which
extends the class with some methods) . I've documented both the
methods
in C and the ones in Ruby (including a general explanation of the
class).
When I run rdoc, however, it only uses the inline documentation from
the
C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of
the
class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?

This is correct. Which RDoc are you using? The latest is 2.4.3.

4

Installing the latest RDoc would be the best solution. RDoc 1.x is unmaintained, and nearly unmaintainable.

···

On Apr 4, 2009, at 12:28, Sven C. Koehler wrote:

On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 05:31:54AM +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:

On Apr 3, 2009, at 06:10, Sven C. Koehler wrote:

I have one class that gets defined in C and has some methods which
were
easier to write in Ruby (so there's rbmodule.c and module.rb, which
extends the class with some methods) . I've documented both the
methods
in C and the ones in Ruby (including a general explanation of the
class).
When I run rdoc, however, it only uses the inline documentation from
the
C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of
the
class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?

This is correct. Which RDoc are you using? The latest is 2.4.3.

I am using RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108, which seems to be the version that
comes with ruby 1.8.6. Would separating the documentation into an extra
file, like modulename.rdoc, work better with older rdoc versions like
this one?