toc_object_entries uses language (Python) scoping instead of documentation scoping about sphinx HOT 2 OPEN

Being a directive shouldn't currentmodule also have an empty line and one level of nesting? Like this:

The currentmodule has no content, but simply sets the module. However, if you use module with content, then it's equivalent to the original example, and produces the wrong TOC as well.

To get the nested class I'd rely only on reST scoping rules so it seems the most robust and language agnostic solution would be to put f() and MyNestedClass on the same level:

Generally I agree that showing them nested is a good default. However, in the original use-case there are multiple nested classes and all involved classes are relatively large, making it desirable to separate them.

from sphinx.

Being a directive shouldn't currentmodule also have an empty line and one level of nesting? Like this:

.. py:currentmodule:: myMod

    .. py:class:: MyClass

        .. py:method:: f()

    .. py:class:: MyClass.MyNestedClass

To get the nested class I'd rely only on reST scoping rules so it seems the most robust and language agnostic solution would be to put f() and MyNestedClass on the same level:

.. py:currentmodule:: myMod

    .. py:class:: MyClass

        .. py:method:: f()

        .. py:class:: MyNestedClass

However I think you're right that:

seems to use the scoping of the language to nest the toc entries, instead of how they were declared in the document.

If you want to document the nested class flattened on the same level as the containing class then the TOC should have given the desired result:

- MyClass
  - MyClass.f()
- MyClass.MyNestedClass 

from sphinx.