> >Oh, wait... how about "rdoc"?
> >
> 
> I think I might sort of like that, except that
> 1. Dave Thomas might not (probably would not) like it (See
>    reasons 2 and 3)
> 2. It might cause confusion
> 3. "rdoc" is already a program name (processor for
>    rdoc-enabled Ruby code)

I didn't know that 'rdoc' was already the name of a program.  I tested 
'rdoc' on my computer and I didn't get anything.  Am I supposed to have 
rdoc?  Why don't I have it?

If rdoc is supposed to come with the standard ruby distribution, then 
maybe Dave will want to extend rdoc for the purposes described above...

Dave?

Cheers,
-- 
Daniel Carrera | "Software is like sex.  It's better when it's free".
PhD student.   | 
Math Dept. UMD |     -- Linus Torvalds