Darkfish is a complete frameless replacement for the default HTML
generator for Rdoc, the API documentation-extraction system for Ruby.
I love you.
From the README:
I’m trying to figure out how to resolve this for the gem.
Suggestions welcomed.
I’ve added code to RubyGems itself to help gem authors automatically
pull in extensions, but it’ll take another release of RDoc to
implement it.
Would you consider allowing RDoc to replace its current HTML generator
with Darkfish? (I did a cursory review, and it seems nice, I will
need to refactor the Numeric.extend to avoid pollution, though.)
I’m trying to figure out how to resolve this for the gem.
Suggestions welcomed.
I’ve added code to RubyGems itself to help gem authors automatically
pull in extensions, but it’ll take another release of RDoc to
implement it.
Would you consider allowing RDoc to replace its current HTML generator
with Darkfish? (I did a cursory review, and it seems nice, I will
need to refactor the Numeric.extend to avoid pollution, though.)
I you do replace it, please keep the old one available under a
different name.
I’m trying to figure out how to resolve this for the gem.
Suggestions welcomed.
I’ve added code to RubyGems itself to help gem authors automatically
pull in extensions, but it’ll take another release of RDoc to
implement it.
Yay!
Would you consider allowing RDoc to replace its current HTML
generator with Darkfish? (I did a cursory review, and it seems
nice, I will need to refactor the Numeric.extend to avoid pollution,
though.)
Of course! It still generates invalid HTML under a few circumstances I
noticed recently, so I’d like to clean those up, but feel free to use
it however you’d like.
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Michael G. [email protected]
wrote:
I’m trying to figure out how to resolve this for the gem. Suggestions
Of course! It still generates invalid HTML under a few circumstances I
noticed recently, so I’d like to clean those up, but feel free to use it
however you’d like.
Few small suggestions:
Shouldn’t that search box go on the top, rather than at the bottom?
I would really love different image/icon for public class methods
and public instance methods, if you would agree.
Darkfish is a complete frameless replacement for the default HTML
generator for Rdoc, the API
documentation-extraction system for Ruby.
This looks beautiful! I love how clean the template file organization
is. I agree with Eric that it would make a great replacement for RDoc’s
default HTML generator.
My only request is for it to allow user-specified templates.
Why another gem? What’s wrong with with having a few choices built-in?
Choice for users means maintenance burden for maintainers. I would
like RDoc to get smaller, not bigger. By moving the current HTML
generator out of RDoc I can push the support burden to people who want
to live in the past. (The HTML generator could use a giant
refactoring, but that would break backwards compatibility, and there’s
still the XML generator to maintain. Since Darkfish sits on top of the
XML generator there is less code, less maintenance and a superior
template to serve as an example for others.)
If 10% of users use a feature I really want to remove it so the people
who find it important can maintain it. Everyone can get better support
this way, as they are working on what they are passionate about.
Pluggable, please!
to live in the past. (The HTML generator could use a giant
refactoring, but that would break backwards compatibility, and there’s
still the XML generator to maintain. Since Darkfish sits on top of the
XML generator there is less code, less maintenance and a superior
template to serve as an example for others.)
If 10% of users use a feature I really want to remove it so the people
who find it important can maintain it. Everyone can get better support
this way, as they are working on what they are passionate about.
In that case you may as well toss it. No one will maintain it.
