Forum: Ruby rdoc -x essentially useless

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Trans (Guest)
on 2007-06-18 22:51
(Received via mailing list)
When I use rdoc like so:

  rdoc -x InstalledFiles *

It includes InstalledFiles anyway because of the *. But if I don't use
the *, it doesn't include any of my top files like README. So AFAICT,
I have no other option but to explicitly list every single file I want
to rdoc on the command line. What a pain!

I just don't see the value in rdoc including a file that's been
explicitly flagged for exclusion via -x/--exclude. Do you? Can we get
sort of fix/feature for this in a future release of RDocs?

Thanks,
T.
Bill K. (Guest)
on 2007-06-18 23:01
(Received via mailing list)
From: "Trans" <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
>
> When I use rdoc like so:
>
>  rdoc -x InstalledFiles *
>
> It includes InstalledFiles anyway because of the *. But if I don't use
> the *, it doesn't include any of my top files like README. So AFAICT,
> I have no other option but to explicitly list every single file I want
> to rdoc on the command line. What a pain!

Possible workaround?

  rdoc `ls * | grep -v InstalledFiles`



Regards,

Bill
Eric H. (Guest)
on 2007-06-18 23:24
(Received via mailing list)
On Jun 18, 2007, at 11:50, Trans wrote:

> explicitly flagged for exclusion via -x/--exclude. Do you? Can we get
> sort of fix/feature for this in a future release of RDocs?

Did you file a bug?

I don't see how you can expect developers to keep track of bugs
"filed" on a mailing list, especially one that isn't for the
development of the software in question.  If you find bugs and want
them fixed, file them in the appropriate bug tracker.
Trans (Guest)
on 2007-06-18 23:35
(Received via mailing list)
On Jun 18, 2:59 pm, "Bill K." <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > I have no other option but to explicitly list every single file I want
> > to rdoc on the command line. What a pain!
>
> Possible workaround?
>
>   rdoc `ls * | grep -v InstalledFiles`

That one doesn't work for a couple of reasons. But yes, we can fashion
a work around along these lines. It's just unfortunate that we have to
do so due to rdoc's hobbled -x option. If you look at other rdoc
utilities, like Rake's rdoc task, you will see that they indeed list
every single file to be rdoc'd. You should see the Facets rdoc command
it literally covers my entire screen!

T.
Trans (Guest)
on 2007-06-18 23:43
(Received via mailing list)
On Jun 18, 3:23 pm, Eric H. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I just don't see the value in rdoc including a file that's been
> > explicitly flagged for exclusion via -x/--exclude. Do you? Can we get
> > sort of fix/feature for this in a future release of RDocs?
>
> Did you file a bug?
>
> I don't see how you can expect developers to keep track of bugs
> "filed" on a mailing list, especially one that isn't for the
> development of the software in question.  If you find bugs and want
> them fixed, file them in the appropriate bug tracker.

Thanks Eric. I will do so...

It's just that I'm not sure it's a bug. I think it was meant to be
that way for some reason. But I think maybe the reason turned out not
to be so good after all, but it's never been addressed b/c other tools
(like the Rake task) took care of the issue. I bring it up here first
to see if my reasoning is sound and that others concur. If they/you
do, I will submit a feature request.

Thanks.
T.
Eric H. (Guest)
on 2007-06-19 01:23
(Received via mailing list)
On Jun 18, 2007, at 12:41, Trans wrote:
>> "filed" on a mailing list, especially one that isn't for the
>> development of the software in question.  If you find bugs and want
>> them fixed, file them in the appropriate bug tracker.
>
> Thanks Eric. I will do so...
>
> It's just that I'm not sure it's a bug. I think it was meant to be
> that way for some reason.

If you're not sure, file a bug.  At worst, the maintainer sees it and
rejects it.  After all, they're the best person to determine if what
you've found is really a bug.

> But I think maybe the reason turned out not to be so good after
> all, but it's never been addressed b/c other tools (like the Rake
> task) took care of the issue. I bring it up here first to see if my
> reasoning is sound and that others concur. If they/you
> do, I will submit a feature request.

What if nobody agrees with you, but it really is a bug?  The
maintainer will never see it then.  Its always better to file a bug.
Trans (Guest)
on 2007-06-19 07:48
(Received via mailing list)
On Jun 18, 5:22 pm, Eric H. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> > that way for some reason.
>
> What if nobody agrees with you, but it really is a bug?  The
> maintainer will never see it then.  Its always better to file a bug.

Good point. It's a Ruby-core issue though, so I don't think it's all
for naught. But anyway, I submitted it. It's like 150th on the list.

T.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.