[#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: Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
Date: 2006-01-13 08:19:41 UTC
List: ruby-core #7133
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, James Britt wrote:
> 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.
> ...

In order to entrench the tests-as-documentation habit firmly in the Ruby 
community, we need a catchy acronym. Like RTFUT = Read the Fabulous Unit 
Tests!

> 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").

Is there a way for code to get automatically included by rdoc and counted 
as doc without having it in two places in the source code? I mean code 
that would get run when loading a library. That way, doing "ri MyStuff" 
could display the contract for MyStuff, supposing that it's in the same 
file as the implementation.

However I suppose that doing it for unit-tests (that are presumably in a
separate file) isn't supported... yet.

 _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - t駘:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montr饌l QC Canada


In This Thread