# Rails destroys rdoc...again **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [June 28, 2006, 4:49am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334 "2006-06-28T04:49:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/a9adbd/32.png) [@carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/carmen)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 4:49am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334/1 "2006-06-28T04:49:46Z")
for many versions of ruby, and as many versions of rails, ive been unable to generate docs without deleting this file: lib/rails\_generator/generators/components/controller/templates/controller.rb ruby just chews more and more memory until swap fils up and the system has to be reset… m gems # rdoc --version RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108 ruby --version ruby 1.8.5 (2006-06-22) [x86\_64-linux] ---
**Author:** ![carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/a9adbd/32.png) [@carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/carmen)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 9:53am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334/2 "2006-06-28T09:53:27Z")
Isn’t 1.8.5 the broken edition? ---
**Author:** ![carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/a9adbd/32.png) [@carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/carmen)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 9:56am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334/3 "2006-06-28T09:56:37Z")
I mean latest? As in too new? ---
**Author:** ![carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/a9adbd/32.png) [@carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/carmen)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2006, 1:08am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334/4 "2006-06-29T01:08:13Z")
> > > > lib/rails\_generator/generators/components/controller/templates/controller.rb > It is possible this is due to a bug in RDoc’s parser. If somebody finds it a post to ruby-core with a reproducible test case would be > appreciated. its just that file. im guessing either this only happens on 64bit architectures, or its a known secret that you have to delete that file to generate rails docs (this is concievable since its only up on the web in a few places) the file is pretty funky anyways, its like a combination of normal ruby and erb… ---
**Author:** ![carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/a9adbd/32.png) [@carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/carmen)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 3:21am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334/5 "2006-06-30T03:21:09Z")
On Jun 28, 2006, at 4:06 PM, carmen wrote: > its just that file. im guessing either this only happens on 64bit > architectures, or its a known secret that you have to delete that > file to generate rails docs (this is concievable since its only up > on the web in a few places) > > the file is pretty funky anyways, its like a combination of normal > ruby and erb… Actually, being a template, there should be a .document file telling RDoc not to process the generators directory. You should file a bug against rails. – Eric H. - removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid - [http://blog.segment7.net](http://blog.segment7.net) This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant [http://trackmap.robotcoop.com](http://trackmap.robotcoop.com) ---
**Author:** ![carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/a9adbd/32.png) [@carmen](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/carmen)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2006, 1:04am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-destroys-rdoc-again/96334/6 "2006-06-29T01:04:46Z")
On Jun 28, 2006, at 12:53 AM, Michael G. wrote: > > > m gems # rdoc --version > > > RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108 > > > ruby --version > > > ruby 1.8.5 (2006-06-22) [x86\_64-linux] > > > > Isn’t 1.8.5 the broken edition? > > I mean latest? As in too new? No. That’s probably 1.8.5p1. RDoc’s parser hasn’t changed much since 1.8.0. It is possible this is due to a bug in RDoc’s parser. If somebody finds it a post to ruby-core with a reproducible test case would be appreciated. – Eric H. - removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid - [http://blog.segment7.net](http://blog.segment7.net) This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant [http://trackmap.robotcoop.com](http://trackmap.robotcoop.com)