Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

Misc #21688

open

Ruby::Box maturing path

Misc #21688: Ruby::Box maturing path

Added by zverok (Victor Shepelev) 15 days ago. Updated 7 days ago.

Status:
Open
Assignee:
-
[ruby-core:123813]

Description

A quick couple of questions in the light of upcoming Ruby 4.0 release and Ruby::Box being available there (even if as an experimental feature):

  1. Should the documentation of the class be available as RDoc? I mean, as standard class documentation at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/master/Ruby/Box.html (404 currently). It seems like RDoc-formatted comments are present in the code but never rendered. Are PRs to make the docs rendered and/or improve/expand them welcome, or would it be just distracting?
  2. Should small(ish) problems/suggestions be reported? Can they be submitted as PRs? (I mean, things like "in some cases, #inspect of the class in the Box is weird", and other stuff like this) Or this would be just distracting from the main work?

Thanks.

Updated by NuriYuri (Youri Nouri) 10 days ago Actions
Copy link
 #1 [ruby-core:123880]

Hi, I've read the box.md file as well as parts of the box.c file.

I'm also very interested into that project but as far as I understood it's not yet ready (some stuff are still to be done as well as some additional tests). I'm sure the rdoc will be added once Ruby::Box is completed.

On my side I believe it's wise to wait for 4.0 to be released because right now there's a lot of pressure on the other issues introduced by 4.0. In January it'll probably be a bit easier for the maintainer to deal with Box issues.

Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) 8 days ago Actions
Copy link
 #2

  • Status changed from Open to Closed

Applied in changeset git|4a0e01d7681e72919f1fae7bc9db744e5a3fbe8c.

[Misc #21688] Teach RDoc about the toplevel module Ruby

Re-open the exising module by calling rb_define_module.
RDoc (RDoc::Parser::C#do_classes_and_modules) does not recognize
rb_path2class as a class/module definition.

Updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev) 8 days ago Actions
Copy link
 #3 [ruby-core:123887]

  • Status changed from Closed to Open

NB: Tentatively reopening this ticket, as it was autoclosed by the referring commit, but the ticket's scope is not only about the inclusion of Ruby::Box in the RDoc output.

Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) 7 days ago Actions
Copy link
 #4 [ruby-core:123891]

zverok (Victor Shepelev) wrote:

  1. Should small(ish) problems/suggestions be reported? Can they be submitted as PRs? (I mean, things like "in some cases, #inspect of the class in the Box is weird", and other stuff like this) Or this would be just distracting from the main work?

Any problems/suggestions/PRs will be welcome to report, of course.
The Box is no different than any other issue.

Actions
Copy link

Also available in: PDF Atom