Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

@eregon
Copy link
Collaborator

@eregon eregon commented Feb 17, 2025

No description provided.

@eregon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

eregon commented Feb 17, 2025

Mmh for some reason https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/FFI/Pointer is way worse than in an older version https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/1.16.3/FFI/Pointer : less methods, doesn't know it inherits from AbstractMemory.
In fact AbstractMemory is almost empty on https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/FFI/AbstractMemory but is better on https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/1.16.3/FFI/AbstractMemory

@eregon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

eregon commented Feb 17, 2025

1.71.0 seems also fine https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/1.17.0/FFI/Pointer so it seems only 1.17.1 is very incomplete.
Maybe some issue during docs generation or maybe due to actual changes in this repo?

@larskanis
Copy link
Member

Local generated yard documentation looks good, but https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/1.17.1/FFI/Pointer misses all C files. No idea why this happens. Even the gem diff doesn't show me a good reason.

@eregon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

eregon commented Feb 17, 2025

Local generated yard documentation looks good

Then maybe we should do something like https://github.com/ruby-concurrency/concurrent-ruby/blob/master/.github/workflows/docs.yml which automatically publishes the docs to GitHub pages.

@eregon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

eregon commented May 19, 2025

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21350#note-1 has a simple workflow for hosting RDoc docs as GitHub Pages.
That seems a good solution.

@eregon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

eregon commented May 19, 2025

The problem seems to have resolved itself somehow, at least
https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/FFI/Pointer
and
https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/1.17.1/FFI/Pointer
looks as good as
https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/ffi/1.17.0/FFI/Pointer

So let's merge this.

@eregon eregon merged commit 29ad900 into master May 19, 2025
34 of 63 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants