Shouldn't this be something like

I figured there was no point when we don't actually want to expose the range for others to extend. We were using that module technique to fake namespaces / nested classes, but here we never want to address it.

I think I'd prefer for it to be consistent, unless there's some reason it shouldn't be.

Ah, turns out such a thing isn't accessible because it's a private entity inside a module. I either have to define FunctionNode inside the same module, or make the class public and write a bunch of redundant documentation or upset the docubot. That being so, I've left its name alone

Ah, right. Can you just make the module private instead of the class to preserve semantics?

Right, but then the class is public and has to be documented despite being unusable?

Sure, but that's the same as most of the internal data-flow stuff anyway.

k, done