On Mar 19, 2009, at 19:00, James Britt wrote:
> Eric Hodel wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 2009, at 15:31, James Britt wrote:
>>> I'm running ruby 1.8.6 (2009-03-10 patchlevel 362) [i686-linux]  
>>> and trying to rdoc the current 1.9 source.
>> Is there a reason you aren't using the rdoc that ships with 1.9  
>> (2.2.2) or the latest RDoc (2.4.1)?
>
> I'm running Ruby 1.8.6 on ruby-doc.org, but want to serve up the  
> rdoc for the 1.9 source.  I also have templates that are not  
> designed for RDoc (2.4.1) (they do not use erb).
>
> At some point I'll convert them, but I'd rather that be a little  
> later than sooner.

I don't think you'll find a better time.

The RDoc 1 code is rather difficult to fix, it's a bit slower and  
quite the memory hog compared to 2.4.

On my machine RDoc 2.3 took over 2G to generate HTML for 1.9 while  
RDoc 2.4 takes under 200M.  For the RDoc source itself, RDoc 2.4 is  
about 10% faster than 2.3.

If you only want to move up to 2.3, it's easy to switch the templates  
over to ERb, the instructions are in ri RDoc::TemplatePage.

2.4 dispenses with the nested hash structure that the HTML generator  
used (which caused the high memory consumption) so switching is a more  
involved process.  I'm willing to give you a hand with that, though.