# Rdoc question: C v Ruby

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rdoc-question-c-v-ruby/164637>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [April 3, 2009, 3:11pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rdoc-question-c-v-ruby/164637 "2009-04-03T15:11:21Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/3be4f8/32.png) [@Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Sven_CSKoehler)\
**Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 3:11pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rdoc-question-c-v-ruby/164637/1 "2009-04-03T15:11:21Z")

</div>

Hello,

I have one class that gets defined in C and has some methods which were  
easier to write in Ruby (so there’s rbmodule.c and module.rb, which  
extends the class with some methods) . I’ve documented both the methods  
in C and the ones in Ruby (including a general explanation of the  
class).  
When I run rdoc, however, it only uses the inline documentation from the  
C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of the  
class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?

Best,

Sven

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/3be4f8/32.png) [@Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Sven_CSKoehler)\
**Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 10:34pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rdoc-question-c-v-ruby/164637/2 "2009-04-03T22:34:50Z")

</div>

On Apr 3, 2009, at 06:10, Sven C. Koehler wrote:

> the  
> class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?

This is correct. Which RDoc are you using? The latest is 2.4.3.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/3be4f8/32.png) [@Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Sven_CSKoehler)\
**Post date:** [April 4, 2009, 9:29pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rdoc-question-c-v-ruby/164637/3 "2009-04-04T21:29:49Z")

</div>

On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 05:31:54AM +0900, Eric H. wrote:

> > C file and not the inline documentation I wrote in the Ruby part of  
> > the  
> > class. Is there maybe another way to organize the rdoc?
> 
> This is correct. Which RDoc are you using? The latest is 2.4.3.

I am using RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108, which seems to be the version that  
comes with ruby 1.8.6. Would separating the documentation into an extra  
file, like modulename.rdoc, work better with older rdoc versions like  
this one?

-S.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/3be4f8/32.png) [@Sven\_CSKoehler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Sven_CSKoehler)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2009, 7:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rdoc-question-c-v-ruby/164637/4 "2009-04-06T07:37:27Z")

</div>

On Apr 4, 2009, at 12:28, Sven C. Koehler wrote:

> > > the  
> > > this one?  
> > > Installing the latest RDoc would be the best solution. RDoc 1.x is  
> > > unmaintained, and nearly unmaintainable.