Move to DocumentSymbol #1795
Move to DocumentSymbol #1795
Conversation
vladbarosan
force-pushed
the
trransition-to-documentsymbols
branch
from
3c71098
to
fde1159
Compare
vladbarosan
force-pushed
the
trransition-to-documentsymbols
branch
from
fde1159
to
6c67109
Compare
|
@JacksonKearl I hope you don't mind I updated the PR to the latest master and refactored it a little |
|
@JacksonKearl , @ramya-rao-a , @jhendrixMSFT if you can have a look since its a change that touches multiple parts. Still testing all the functionality touched. will update when im done |
vladbarosan
force-pushed
the
trransition-to-documentsymbols
branch
5 times, most recently
from
1ebdc18
to
6e3393c
Compare
| label, | ||
| decl.type, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the "details" that is shown next to the symbol in the outline feature?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes ( so in this case would look like the name and next to it the type ( e.g. package, function etc)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also looking in go-outline, everything seems fine, but we stop only at the function level. do we own https://github.com/lukehoban/go-outline ? seems we could get more from the AST
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We own the fork of it https://github.com/ramya-rao-a/go-outline
Feel free to look into that for improvements
There was a problem hiding this comment.
well it seems we might be able to get more info from the AST, of things inside the functions, @jhendrixMSFT has more experience with the Go AST, he can confirm.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Absolutely. I've opened #2370 to track enhancing the outline view.
vladbarosan
force-pushed
the
trransition-to-documentsymbols
branch
from
33d9d34
to
e9ebecd
Compare
vladbarosan
force-pushed
the
trransition-to-documentsymbols
branch
from
e9ebecd
to
aba4a83
Compare
|
@ramya-rao-a @jhendrixMSFT @JacksonKearl everything touched seemed fine on testing, so if you want to double check, otherwise from my side I think its good to go. |
this closes #1772