We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
I think similar to #164 RDoc should be able to reference #[] and #[]=.
#[]
#[]=
I tried writing a similar test, but for some reason it actually passes:
diff --git a/test/test_rdoc_cross_reference.rb b/test/test_rdoc_cross_reference.rb index ecb5f9a..c01225a 100644 --- a/test/test_rdoc_cross_reference.rb +++ b/test/test_rdoc_cross_reference.rb @@ -144,6 +144,20 @@ class TestRDocCrossReference < XrefTestCase assert_ref m, '===' end + def test_resolve_method_getter + m = RDoc::AnyMethod.new '', '[]' + @c1.add_method m + + assert_ref m, '[]' + end + + def test_resolve_method_setter + m = RDoc::AnyMethod.new '', '[]=' + @c1.add_method m + + assert_ref m, '[]=' + end +
Maybe I'm missing something.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Update history for #202, #191
c838b02
Fixed by @ 4943d20
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
I think similar to #164 RDoc should be able to reference
#[]
and#[]=
.I tried writing a similar test, but for some reason it actually passes:
Maybe I'm missing something.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: