On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:28 AM, aslak hellesoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 4:20 AM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 5:47 PM, rubyphunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > same problem here. I always used "example.implementation_backtrace" in >> > a custom formatter to find out to which spec file a passing example >> > belongs to. >> > Is there another way to get the file path? >> >> Looking through the code I see the name was changed to >> example_backtrace, and I can see why it was changed to that. In fact, >> looking closer I really think it should just be backtrace. >> >> I'm going to change it to #backtrace, rdoc it up to formalize its >> place in the world as an API method, and, in the interest of playing >> nice w/ NetBeans, reinstate a deprecated implementation_backtrace that >> delegates to backtrace. >> >> Rubyphunk, what you can do in the short run is alias >> implementation_backtrace, example_backtrace, but you'll have to change >> that for the next release. Sorry about the churn, but this was really >> not a formally public method to begin with. Now we will make it so. > > How will people know that a method is part of an API? Can we simply say that > if it has RDoc it's part of the API and stable, and if it doesn't it's not? > (We can still RDoc non-API code, just put :nodoc: on it so it doesn't get > part of the API docs). > > WDYT?
I think that's where we want to land. It's going to take a bit of a going through to get there though. I think that should be part of a 1.2 release (not necessarily the very next release) - that we put a line in the sand as far as that is concerned. Another thing to consider is what the Merb team has done, where public methods are marked with ":api: public" in the RDoc. In fact, they've done a good job of RDoco in general, with Parameters, Returns and Notes consistently separated. WDYTAT? > > Aslak > >> >> Cheers, >> David >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > lg // andreas >> > >> > >> > On 20 Nov., 20:37, Scott Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Nov 20, 2008, at 2:35 PM, David Chelimsky wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Ben Fyvie >> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > wrote: >> >> >> We just upgraded from rspec version 1.1.4 to rspec version 1.1.11 >> >> >> and found >> >> >> that this no longer exists: >> >> >> >> >> # File lib/spec/example/example_methods.rb, line 84 >> >> >> >> >> def implementation_backtrace >> >> >> >> >> eval("caller", @_implementation) >> >> >> >> >> end >> >> >> >> >> I don't really know what this method is for and don't really care >> >> >> that it is >> >> >> gone; however, Netbeans 6.5 does care that it is gone and is not >> >> >> able to run >> >> >> tests without it. As a temporary band-aid I have added the method >> >> >> back >> >> >> locally. I was wondering if someone could enlighten me as to why >> >> >> the method >> >> >> was removed? >> >> >> >> > Unfortunately we don't yet have a formal API for tool vendors to use, >> >> > so NetBeans apparently used a method that we view as internal and it >> >> > got moved or renamed during a refactoring. >> >> >> >> > This is something we plan to address over the coming months: >> >> > formalizing an API for extension and tool use. >> >> >> >> Also, check out this: >> >> >> >> http://metaclass.org/2008/6/7/calling-in-the-dark >> >> >> >> Scott >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> rspec-users mailing list >> >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >> > _______________________________________________ >> > rspec-users mailing list >> > rspec-users@rubyforge.org >> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> rspec-users mailing list >> rspec-users@rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users@rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users