@vasily-kirichenko Do we need all members? I remember ReSharper adding such completion for properties/fields only and am OK with it this way. I don't think I'd call a method this way from completion.

Fixed.

@auduchinok why not?

@vasily-kirichenko I'm a bit afraid of how many members there may be when lots of assemblies are referenced. Probably a good compromise would be to make it optional.

We'll do some acceptance testing on projects with a bunch of assemblies before pulling this. I imagine perf would be proportional to how it is today (unless there are tons of solutions out there which use crazy amounts of static members compared with instance members, which I doubt is very common).

It's ready.

Why are we showing static members? Surely these should only show after you’ve dotted into the type that has the static members?

@saul, it is the same idea of having the namespaces open when you put a type name from a namespace which is not in scope.

Since F# has few places where static member needs the explicit prefix (in instance members of a same class) and in more general cases (like looking for an extension method which is not in scope), I think that feature is useful.

@vasily-kirichenko thanks for that feature! is there a special handling for the extension methods already or can we consider adding it?

Here is what Resharper does in C# code, here it shows extension methods that are not in scope.

I tried the same in recently updated VS2017 and it doesn't have that, but maybe I need to install a nighlty?

@smoothdeveloper extention members are not supported. To do it we need to collect all of them in a separate list in assembly content cache and mix into after-dot completion.

@saul because ReSharper does this and it would be great to be on par with C# completion in Rider. Personally I cannot say if this feature is useful or not, will see.

Ooookey, it's ready.