Has anyone seen this?
For one of my projects, I can use older rdoc’s successfully. But a
recent CVS version gives:
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:107:in read_up_to': Missing end tag in template: :methods (RuntimeError) from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:181:in
substitute_into’
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:146:in
write_html_on' from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/generators/html_generator.rb:568:in
write_on’
…
The versions I have are:
RDoc V0.9.0: 2003/03/10 03:50:33 (1.70)
and
RDoc Vgs: 2003/08/22 12:33:37 (1.72)
(actually, from CVS on 05 Oct 2003)
I’m not using any custom templates or anything. Just RDoc out of the box.
Could you e-mail me the source file that causes it to do this?
Thanks
Dave
···
On Monday, Oct 13, 2003, at 00:43 US/Central, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
Has anyone seen this?
For one of my projects, I can use older rdoc’s successfully. But a
recent CVS version gives:
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:107:in
read_up_to': Missing end tag in template: :methods (RuntimeError) from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:181:in
substitute_into’
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:146:in
write_html_on' from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/generators/ html_generator.rb:568:in
write_on’
Dave Thomas wrote:
Has anyone seen this?
For one of my projects, I can use older rdoc’s successfully. But a
recent CVS version gives:
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:107:in
read_up_to': Missing end tag in template: :methods (RuntimeError) from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:181:in
substitute_into’
from
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/template.rb:146:in
write_html_on' from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rdoc/generators/ html_generator.rb:568:in
write_on’
Could you e-mail me the source file that causes it to do this?
I reinstalled the recent version of rdoc, and the problem went away.
Very strange. Oh, well. I’ll let you know if it happens again.
···
On Monday, Oct 13, 2003, at 00:43 US/Central, Joel VanderWerf wrote: