# Any reason 'Core API Docs' include non-core classes?

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/any-reason-core-api-docs-include-non-core-classes/51052>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [December 24, 2005, 10:16pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/any-reason-core-api-docs-include-non-core-classes/51052 "2005-12-24T22:16:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gyoung-Yoon\_N](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c77e96/32.png) [@Gyoung-Yoon\_N](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Gyoung-Yoon_N)\
**Post date:** [December 24, 2005, 10:16pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/any-reason-core-api-docs-include-non-core-classes/51052/1 "2005-12-24T22:16:06Z")

</div>

Hi,

I have wondered why 'Core API Docs’[1](http://ruby-doc.org/core/) include non-core classes  
following:

Abbrev  
Benchmark  
Benchmark::Tms  
CGI  
ConditionVariable  
Find  
Logger  
Logger::Application  
Logger::Error  
Logger::LogDevice  
Logger::Severity  
Logger::ShiftingError  
Matrix  
Mutex  
Observable  
Pathname  
Queue  
Set  
Shellwords  
Singleton  
SingletonClassMethods  
SizedQueue  
SortedSet  
Tempfile  
ThreadsWait  
Vector  
YAML

Any reason why those classes are included in ‘Core API Docs’?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gyoung-Yoon\_N](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c77e96/32.png) [@Gyoung-Yoon\_N](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Gyoung-Yoon_N)\
**Post date:** [December 24, 2005, 11:55pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/any-reason-core-api-docs-include-non-core-classes/51052/2 "2005-12-24T23:55:29Z")

</div>

Gyoung-Yoon N. wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have wondered why ‘Core API Docs’[1] include non-core classes following:

…

> Any reason why those classes are included in ‘Core API Docs’?

Coincidence? The core rdocs are the result of running rdoc over the  
main source dir. There are few things in there that are not actually  
core libs, but get pulled into the rdoc anyway.

I would much prefer if all classes/modules were in the same rdoc space,  
with the docs for each file indicating what, if any, ‘require’ call is  
needed, but rdoc is fairly limited.

One should not have to know if a library is part of the core API or the  
standard library or some middle world in order to use the rdocs for the  
standard distro.

James

–

[http://www.ruby-doc.org](http://www.ruby-doc.org) - Ruby Help & Documentation  
[Ruby Code & Style](http://www.artima.com/rubycs/) - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted  
[http://www.rubystuff.com](http://www.rubystuff.com) - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff  
[http://www.jamesbritt.com](http://www.jamesbritt.com) - Playing with Better Toys  
[http://www.30secondrule.com](http://www.30secondrule.com) - Building Better Tools

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gyoung-Yoon\_N](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c77e96/32.png) [@Gyoung-Yoon\_N](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Gyoung-Yoon_N)\
**Post date:** [December 25, 2005, 12:25am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/any-reason-core-api-docs-include-non-core-classes/51052/3 "2005-12-25T00:25:35Z")

</div>

On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 22:54:14 -0000, James B. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)  
wrote:

> One should not have to know if a library is part of the core API or the  
> standard library or some middle world in order to use the rdocs for the  
> standard distro.

After initially exploring it, I forgot all about it and probably  
respoked  
a few wheels before I was reminded (here) the other day that the  
standard  
library existed. I tend to selectively forget stuff and surf the doc  
when  
I need it, so I’d definitely favour a single doc set too…