Josh, it hurts my head in a circular motion, but if someone wrote a .shy packager as an RDoc formatter for the mythical Rdoc that doesn't exist, that would be good. We still need the Rdoc.
--Cecil On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 21:53 -0700, Joshua Ballanco wrote: > Just an idea... > > To tie this all back into Shoes, would there be interest in writing a > generator for Rdoc which could emit a .shy or shoes .rb? What would > the generated file look like? I think something like this could be > rather attractive, and at least a little bit more interactive than the > current ri or html output (i.e. Fire up a irb console inline to try > out the code as you're reading about it). > > -Josh > > > On Jul 14, 2008, at 9:09 PM, Cecil Coupe wrote: > > > Bad form to reply to my own message. Sorry. > > > > A shoes command-line option to generate Rdoc from the mythical > > introspecter. Kind of like "$shoes --manual" but without a GUI result. > > Maybe "$shoes --rdoc" could produce the Rdoc from the introspection. > > That wouldn't reduce the Shoes approachability for the target > > audience. > > > > --Cecil > > > > On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 21:34 -0600, Cecil Coupe wrote: > >> A master inheritance chart with links would be very nice! It doesn't > >> have to be searchable, that's a non-issue for that view of the API, > >> imho. I don't know that my skills are up to the task so I won't > >> volunteer to write it. > >> > >> I have been experimenting with a tiny script that copies the ruby.c > >> into > >> another directory and modifies the C to be rdoc parseable. It kind of > >> works for a limited definition of 'works'. Rdoc does have the > >> advantage > >> of generating static html and other formats and is kind of > >> "mainstream" > >> for the task. As a Ruby newbie, I needed to understand Rdoc. I > >> suspect > >> it's probably a dead end on Shoes, so someone who loves reflection > >> shouldn't wait for me. > >> > >> --Cecil > >> > >> On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 11:32 -0500, _why wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 08:45:20PM +1000, Bluebie, Jenna wrote: > >>>> Probably wouldn't be all that hard to make a shoes app that > >>>> reflects on > >>>> itself to inspect widgets and objects! > >>> > >>> Perhaps what was does with the color list could be done here, too. > >>> With the color list, we're generating a manual page introspectively. > >>> Shoes could be taught to draw a master inheritance chart with links > >>> to the method and class docs. It wouldn't be searchable, though, > >>> as it would be more of an index. > >>> > >>> _why > >> > > >
