change traverse search to breadth first?

[jashmenn]

Should we change the search to breadth first? I often find that's what I intend vs. depth first.

Consider the following code:

class Foo {
  constructor() {
     initialize();
  }

  initialize() {
    // stuff here
  }

  more() {
    // ...
  }

  // ...
}

I find I always expect the query .Foo-.initialize to get from class Foo { down through the initialize() method, but instead I get the call within the constructor.

I'm not sure which is clearer - doing a breadth first or depth first. Depth first at least has a certain level of predictability because it reads roughly downward through lines of code.

[jashmenn]

Conversation from Slack with @acco

acco [12:02 PM]  
Hmm I think I was also expecting breadth-first, if even unconsciously. I think it's far more common that you'll want to grab a range just one-level deep

eigenjoy [12:03 PM]  
ah interesting yeah

acco [12:03 PM]  
e.g., in that example, just the first-level of children of `Foo`

eigenjoy [12:03 PM]  
right! and because you can go deeper with child selectors, but you can’t not-go-deeper with a depth first

acco [12:03 PM]  
If I wanted to show parts of `constructor()` (assuming it was a longer func), again, one-level deep there

acco [12:03 PM]  
Exactly!

acco [12:04 PM]  
Yeah, I could be like: `.Foo .constructor .initialize-.someOtherFunc`

[jashmenn]

After talking w/ @acco I think it makes more sense that we switch to breadth-first. This is obviously a breaking change, so we'll need a major version upgrade. So it's better that we do this sooner rather than later.

Any objections?