Does this grammar support the full VimScript language?

[viegasfh]

Hi there!

First and foremost, thank you and congratulations on providing this tree-sitter grammar for VimScript. Second, I was wondering what parts of the language are not yet supported and what part are supported. I noticed that the regular expressions aren't yet supported, and I have read the reasons in an issue someone brought up. However, I am interested to know what parts of the language are still not implemented.

Thanks once again and congratulations on the great job you have done on putting this together.

Regards,

Fidel H Viegas

[Fymyte]

Hi @viegasfh, technically all language constructions are supported (there is still some errors here and there, for :command for exemple, which needs fixes). What's missing are mainly built-in commands, event tho there is a default fallback for unknown onces there is some use cases which needs to be addressed as a per command basis.
If you find a parsing error, or need a command to be supported do not hesitate to report it.

About viml patterns, they are technically supported. The parser does not provide provide a lot of granularity on recognized nodes however, for the reason discussed in the issue you mentioned.

[viegasfh]

@Fymyte , thanks for your succinct feedback! I sure will report any errors whenever I find them. Once again, congratulations on the work invested in this project.

[jchros]

If anyone wants to participate in the effort to add commands in the grammar, I have uploaded a file listing all of Neovim's (built-in) commands here. Imo it wouldn't be a good idea to add every command in there, but we should at least add the commands taking an argument.