On Nov 7, 2004, at 17:37, James Britt wrote:
> Right.  I see this as a developer convenience for creating methods.  
> An implementation detail, not an expression of intent that should be 
> exposed in the API documentation.

That's where we differ, and why RDoc distinguishes between attr and 
regular method definitions. It isn't just a macro facility: it's an 
expression of intent.

We had this discussion before--attributes are not the same as instance 
variables. I never convinced you then, and I suspect I won't now.

Sam has raised some good points, though, and I may see if I can warp 
the internals enough to handle :attr: modifiers.

Cheers

Dave