Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="James Britt, post: 4455889"] Not at the moment. Those doc pages are generated from rdoc, and the anchors to method names a re abstract strings, not the method names themselves. So you get this: [URL]http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Enumerable.html#M001864[/URL] You need to know that M001864 is the 'map' method. Now, there is an alternative: [URL]http://www.ruby-doc.org/find/pickaxe/Enumerable#map[/URL] though this is calling into an HTML version of the first edition of Programming Ruby, by Dave Thomas and Andy Hunt. It is not the most current documentation. (There was a similar URL look-up system for ri, but it relied on the XML formatting option that apparently has been removed from the current ri, and I haven't managed to fix this yet.) Depends. How often would there be requests, and by how many people? Put another way, how does this differ from people viewing the pages directly in a browser to help them while coding? I don't see a problem. In general, I like the idea of serving up data services for remote applications, though in practice I would have to see how the bandwidth goes if ruby-doc had a more direct Web API for accessing documentation. (Though the data format should be something other than HTML 4.) I would like that, and have taken some stabs at writing a wrapper that would allow comments on arbitrary HTML pages, but have gotten sidetracked by numerous other projects. No, I think I understand. It is a problem that one cannot easily locate and/or bookmark specific methods and classes. The framed view of the docs is handy for certain things, but not others. And allowing comments on the docs would be sweet. It is yet another item on my "This has been taking forever" ruby-doc rewrite. James [/QUOTE]

Verification