[#7055] More on VC++ 2005 — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>

Okay. I've got Ruby compiling. I'm attempting to get everything in

17 messages 2006/01/05
[#7058] Re: More on VC++ 2005 — nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@...> 2006/01/06

Hi,

[#7084] mathn: ugly warnings — hadmut@... (Hadmut Danisch)

Hi,

22 messages 2006/01/10
[#7097] Re: mathn: ugly warnings — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...> 2006/01/10

Hadmut Danisch wrote:

[#7098] Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings) — mathew <meta@...> 2006/01/10

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#7118] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings) — mathew <meta@...> 2006/01/12

*Dean Wampler *<deanwampler gmail.com> writes:

[#7226] Fwd: Re: Question about massive API changes — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>

Hello,

23 messages 2006/01/28
[#7228] Re: Question about massive API changes — Caleb Tennis <caleb@...> 2006/01/28

>

Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)

From: James Britt <ruby@...>
Date: 2006-01-12 21:47:36 UTC
List: ruby-core #7127
ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, James Britt wrote:
>

>
>>
>> But what will the user see from ri and rdoc?
> 
> 
> nothing.  i've found myself using them less and less - at this point i use
> them about once per month.  my feeling is that
> 
>   vi -o samples/*
> 
> is much more powerful.
>

For a certain subset of Ruby developers.

...

> my intent in posting this, btw, was just to bring attention to the fact 
> that
> i've found it useful and people who love docs and unit tests might 
> consider it
> as another weapon.

Oh, I agree.  I want to see more examples and tests included as well, 
but there needs to be some form of easily-accessible doc set to 
accompany with binary-only Ruby packages (e.g., the Windows "1-click").


James

In This Thread