On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Andreas Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 2:28 PM, aslak hellesoy > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> 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? >> >> Aslak > > Wouldn't it be better to have a kind of standalone api. An interface > where the internal implementation can be changed but the public one > stays (mostly) consistent over different releases? IMO going this way, > the rspec-development would be more aware of changes to that API. > > lg // andreas
Can you elaborate? What would make an api "standalone" in this context? > > > >>> 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 > _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users