[DOC] Enhanced RDoc for String

[BurdetteLamar]

Treats:

• #split
• #each_line
• #lines
• #each_byte
• #bytes

[peterzhu2118]

I should probably have brought this up earlier, but moving the documentation out of the source (string.c) makes the Toggle source feature of RDoc useless. I think we should find a way to keep that feature functional. I see @duerst brought this up many years ago in ruby/rdoc#409. Has there been any progress on that issue?

[BurdetteLamar]

I should probably have brought this up earlier, but moving the documentation out of the source (string.c) makes the Toggle source feature of RDoc useless. I think we should find a way to keep that feature functional. I see @duerst brought this up many years ago in ruby/rdoc#409. Has there been any progress on that issue?

I think it's important to be able to show non-US-ASCII in the examples, especially for classes such as String and Encoding. I'm thinking that many methods's documentation, in String, Encoding, and perhaps others, would profit from examples outside of US-ASCII.

So the issue, as I see it, is whether such examples should wait for an RDoc resolution, or we should go ahead and put them into the C code as we go. Does this need to go to the developers' meeting?

Or, alternatively, we could establish the convention of including the RDoc; if so, we'd need to decide where to put the files. Perhaps in doc/string/, doc/encoding/, etc?

[peterzhu2118]

I absolutely agree that we should have non-ASCII examples. We should think of a solution that doesn't break any of the existing features of RDoc. I won't let this issue block you, just something for us to think about in parallel.

[BurdetteLamar]

@peterzhu2118, this is ready, then?

After this merge, I'll make include files for a couple of String methods; then we can get some comments from other committers?

[peterzhu2118]

I just put in a few more comments