Node#parent: fix documentation

[paddor]

No description provided.

[ioquatix]

Thanks for this.

However, after checking, the syntax of the subsequent attribute is wrong, not this one:

https://github.com/ioquatix/decode/blob/9d6f88e84116d999ddd77eb10a68c2c3417535ba/lib/decode/comment/attribute.rb#L15

The "name" is not a required feature of the attribute tag. So I'll remove the subsequent one and close this PR without merging.

Thanks for your contribution.

[paddor]

I don't see what's wrong with the subsequent #children attribute. But the documentation of the #parent attribute currently looks like this:

#The parent node.=(parentnode. = (value)) ⇒ Object

The missing name is the only thing I noticed is different from the other attributes.

[ioquatix]

That looks messed up, let me check it.

[ioquatix]

At least according to YARD, I don't think the attribute name is required, especially if it's just repeating what the attribute is already called. Maybe it's something wrong with rubydoc.info? What documentation generation tool are they using?

[paddor]

Yeah, it should be YARD. It doesn't really now the @attribute directive. It has @!attribute, which is for attributes created with meta-programming.

I usually document normal attributes like this:

      # @return [Messaging::Handlers::Base]
      attr_reader :messaging

It's not very intuitive. Oh well.

Utopia looks very nice but what I miss are superclasses (socketry/utopia-project#3), inherited methods, and private methods. It just makes a quick reading of a method's implementation that much more comprehensible.

[ioquatix]

I think we can add those things - let me take a look.

Regarding private methods, I deliberately avoid listing them in the public API documentation to prevent people from using them or expecting them to exist. Do you have a different opinion?