# Modify RDoc to pick up my attribute metaprogramming methods? **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [April 3, 2007, 2:06pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/modify-rdoc-to-pick-up-my-attribute-metaprogramming-methods/90975 "2007-04-03T14:06:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Clifford\_H](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/49beb7/32.png) [@Clifford\_H](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Clifford_H)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 2:06pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/modify-rdoc-to-pick-up-my-attribute-metaprogramming-methods/90975/1 "2007-04-03T14:06:20Z")
Those of you who might have used my Chattr gem will have found that RDoc doesn’t find the attributes it defines. This is because hidden inside RDoc’s Ruby parser (parsers/parse\_rb.rb), in parse\_statements, is a case statement that matches the known kernel metaprogramming methods. If you want to add to these methods, you can add them on the command line if you use --accessors, which is fine if the syntax is the same (parameters are all Symbols), but mine aren’t. Really I need a way during Chattr’s initialization, to add an accessor and associated block to RDoc, so RDoc passes an array of params to the block, from which it can filter the symbols. That way any program that requires Chattr automagically gets RDoc for Chattrs methods. What do you reckon? Is this a good idea? Is there a better way? Who do I need to contact about the required RDoc changes - is this core now? Clifford H… ---
**Author:** ![Clifford\_H](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/49beb7/32.png) [@Clifford\_H](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Clifford_H)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2007, 10:05am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/modify-rdoc-to-pick-up-my-attribute-metaprogramming-methods/90975/2 "2007-04-04T10:05:46Z")
Surely enough people are creating metaprogramming methods that they must also want RDoc to do this? Ara - how well does RDoc document arrayfields for example? Wouldn’t you want to add something to arrayfields produces suitable doc for RDoc? Ok, so the arrayfields extension is dynamic, that makes it hard… but still… Anyone? Clifford H…