From: "Benjamin R. Haskell" <zsh@benizi.com>
To: "Alexey I. Froloff" <raorn@altlinux.org>
Cc: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Completion/Unix/Commands/_ri: updated for Ruby 1.9.2
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 01:07:09 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1101052337490.2792@hp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110106003014.GA11154@altlinux.org>
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Alexey I. Froloff wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 04:27:35PM -0500, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
>> Maybe it makes sense, but it seems weird that the tests are
>> conditioned on running Ruby scripts rather than looking at `ri
>> --version`.
> ri --version reports something weird. I don't know since when things
> were changed, checking for modules that have been removed or added
> seems to be fair enough.
>
> Are you thinking there's too much (and too direct) ruby invocations?
Yes, that was the concern. I guess it's not really that much. The
repetitive portion that keeps the arguments that the user has already
passed:
${(kv)opt_args[(I)-d|--doc-dir|...etc...]}
made me think at first glance that there was more coding than there
actually is.
>> And how does this fare against different Ruby implementations? Would
>> JRuby 1.9.2 necessarily use the same 'ri' conventions as MRI Ruby
>> 1.9.2?
> Yes. Latest JRuby supports both 1.8 and 1.9 Ruby versions and have
> copies of standard runtime libraries (both versions) which includes
> RI.
Okay. (Didn't know whether Ruby implementations had different
arguments [ala C++ compilers].)
>> And more generally, since it's looking in directories that would only
>> contain Ruby documentation, would it hurt to include both .yaml and
>> .ri for versions that support .ri?
> I thought about it, yes. Newer RI doesn't read .yaml documentation.
> It wouldn't hurt, but it would complete something that can't be shown.
Saynomore. I was in the process of trying to install 1.9.2 alongside
1.8.7 on my Gentoo machine, so I couldn't check as much: if the newer
version can't read it, it makes sense to not show it.
> This patch will un-break ri completion for latest stable MRI Ruby
> version. I wrote this completion and I am responsible for that.
Was still broken for me until I added the patch that I just sent.
> However, I am not satisfied with current implementation, I'm working
> on it.
Out of curiosity, what don't you like at this point?
--
Best,
Ben
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-06 6:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-30 22:41 Alexey I. Froloff
2011-01-04 11:32 ` Alexey I. Froloff
2011-01-05 21:27 ` Benjamin R. Haskell
2011-01-06 0:30 ` Alexey I. Froloff
2011-01-06 6:07 ` Benjamin R. Haskell [this message]
2011-01-06 6:01 ` [PATCH] Completion/Unix/Commands/_ri: missed format change Benjamin R. Haskell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LNX.2.01.1101052337490.2792@hp \
--to=zsh@benizi.com \
--cc=raorn@altlinux.org \
--cc=zsh-workers@zsh.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).