tree-sitter-cpp VS tree-sitter-c-sharp

Grammar page (https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-cpp) reference two documents at the very end:

- Hyperlinked C++ BNF Grammar (https://alx71hub.github.io/hcb/)

- EBNF Syntax: C++ (ISO/IEC 14882:1998(E)) https://www.externsoft.ch/download/cpp-iso.html

The second doc has a year in the title, so it's ancient af.

The feature isn't working well yet on C and C++. If I recall correctly it's based on Tree-Sitter[1] parsing, and there are still too many bugs in corresponding grammars - tree-sitter-c[2] and tree-sitter-cpp[3]. Hopefully, it will be greatly improved in the future as the share of the existing and newly written code in C and C++ is quite significant.

[1] https://tree-sitter.github.io/tree-sitter/

[2] https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-c/issues

[3] https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-cpp/issues

There's treesitter-cpp parser that works to some extent already. However, for complex language like c++, I think it would be better to use lsp's semantic highlighting instead

C++ is currently unsupported, but there's a good tree-sitter implementation I can add: https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-cpp

Any particular reasons you were looking at that old commit ? the latest master branch seems to have a highlights.scm file

tree-sitter seems to support records as well as a lot of other things. That said, it might not be exposed in csharp mode yet. In my experience it has been super easy to add new constructs. Some time in the future I will make this user customizable as well. Maybe you want something to be highlighted as keywords which has a different default. That sort of thing.