@fbrau OK, thanks for testing. I'm merging this for now because it improves the situation a fair bit, but we can still discuss the details.

For whether the module should be shown or not, it's probably a bit of taste, and a bit of meaning, for example:

can anything in an Erlang file declaring a module not be in that module? There still seem to be some tags that are not inside the module (macros, types…): is that correct, or should they also all be in the module scope?
can an Erlang file not declare a module? If so, doesn't it make sense to create a tag for the module declaration, and then, doesn't it make sense to set the proper scope on the members?

As mentioned, I'd rather not just "hide" the module scope as a special case, because it's a very specific non-trivial code change that might (or might not?) be partly dictated by your taste (which is fine, but might not be universal).
Also, note that there's not an option in the symbols list not to split symbols into groups (Structs, Macros, etc.) and only the hierarchy as a whole. That's admittedly kind of the opposite of what you're asking for, but depending on your usage and the reasons why you don't like the grouping, you might actually like it (or hate it, turn it off again 🙂 )

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.