Mixed styles for class methods on Tempfile break RDocs.
I've already made a little pull request here https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/691.
The diff is here: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/691.diff
But to make the real changes clear is it better to ignore white-space (as there are many indentation changes).
Changes ignoring white-space: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/691/files?w=1
lib/tempfile.rb: include doc of Tempfile.open
- lib/tempfile.rb: start rdoc parsing inside singleton class definition to include the document there. [Bug #10105]
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://ci.ruby-lang.org/ruby/trunk@47133 b2dd03c8-39d4-4d8f-98ff-823fe69b080e
#2 [ruby-core:64208] Updated by eloyesp (Eloy Esp) almost 4 years ago
I don't think that it is only a bug in RDoc.
There are at least 3 ways to define class methods in ruby, and I think that all are acceptable, but define two class methods in different ways in the standard library it's not a good example, nor a good practice and does not help in readability.
Ok, there is a lacking feature in RDoc, but I don't think that keeping it that way is the way to go.
#4 [ruby-core:64253] Updated by zzak (Zachary Scott) almost 4 years ago
- Assignee changed from drbrain (Eric Hodel) to zzak (Zachary Scott)
- Status changed from Third Party's Issue to Assigned
This may be a bug in RDoc, but we can fix it without redefining the methods by using the document method directive:
Could you send a patch for this instead?
#5 [ruby-core:64292] Updated by eloyesp (Eloy Esp) almost 4 years ago
I've tried to fix it only touching documentation, and it seems to be
impossible, rdoc does not understand the
class << self syntax (I
understand rdoc in this point, ruby is not easy to parse). I've added an
issue in Rdoc for it ( https://github.com/rdoc/rdoc/issues/317 ).
So the Tempfile.open method needs to be redefined to be understand by rdoc.
I've updated the pull request with the minimal change that will fix the
issue I don't like it as it define class methods outside of the class
itself (so the source is harder to read), and it hardcode the class name
two times (that I think is ugly).
I quite not understand why there is so much resistance to refactor the code
#6 [ruby-core:64294] Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) almost 4 years ago
- Status changed from Assigned to Closed
- % Done changed from 0 to 100