Add support cpp parser

[Mephistophiles]

No description provided.

[Mephistophiles]

Whoops.
A commit from a neighboring branch got here.
I think this PR will be in draft before the PR #116 is merged.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 81.81818% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 86.47%. Comparing base (9238fc1) to head (b8be840).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/scoping/langs/cpp.rs	81.39%	8 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #134      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.58%   86.47%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files          32       33       +1     
  Lines        1975     2019      +44     
==========================================
+ Hits         1710     1746      +36     
- Misses        265      273       +8     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[alexpovel]

#116 merged 🎉 Thanks again for your contribution! Feel free to rebase this.

[alexpovel]

I realize this is a draft, but left some comments already!

[alexpovel]

Perhaps you can find a more creative example (and file name) 😄 An operation like "rename class" can already be performed very well using IDEs. srgn is more meant for things IDEs, sed etc. cannot already easily perform.

[Mephistophiles]

Tried to make a more useful example. I did the best I could 😆

[alexpovel]

Looks good! I'm not familiar with C++. Feel free to go wild here. In all the other base files, I tried to put literally every single component the respective languages offer. You can for example take base.py, and hand it together with a C++ grammar definition to an LLM and ask it for a similar file, but for C++.

The reason as much as possible should be covered is to just have maximum confidence in terms of test coverage, and true/false positive matches. It guards against regressions in tree-sitter.

This is not a must-have though.

[Mephistophiles]

I changed the example: the example was generated by LLM. I'm not sure it's a complete set of cpp features (I'm more specialized in C language) =).

[alexpovel]

Thank you very much! The revised example for the README looks good, at least like something you might not find in IDEs.

Let me know when you're ready to move the PR out of draft.

[alexpovel]

Just a heads-up, work in this PR will conflict with #144 . Currently I prefer merging #144 before this C++ PR. If that will end up happening, I'll fix the conflicts for you, so no worries. (but feel free to fix it yourself if you like... #144 will make implementing languages easier anyway)

[Mephistophiles]

I think it is better to merge this PR after #144. After that I will fix the conflicts myself. And so maybe I'll come up with a more useful example :).

[alexpovel]

Hi @Mephistophiles !

#144 was split off into #151 , which is now merged into main and contains the language refactors. So feel free to refactor your PR onto main now.

And for the example you now have, I like it!