Coverage
What exists versus what is written. The denominator is not a guess: it is every construct the official documentation describes, so a missing page cannot hide.
By topic
| Topic | Constructs | Written | |
|---|---|---|---|
| How to read these rules | 1 | 1 | |
| Terms & literals | 16 | 0 | |
| Operators | 164 | 3 | |
| Types, classes & roles | 355 | 0 |
Where Raku++ does not parse the spelling
Probed directly: a minimal use of each construct is fed to the interpreter and classified by whether it parses. 14 spellings do not — but read the two groups separately, because they mean very different things.
Unicode spellings (11)
These are alternative spellings, not missing operators. Raku lets many operators be written with a mathematical symbol as well as in ASCII — ⩵ for ==, ≼ for (<+). Raku++ not accepting the symbol says nothing about the operator itself: == works exactly as expected. Where the documentation puts a working spelling under the same heading, it is named on the card.
« »method call≡chaining≢chaining≼chaining≽chaining⊄chaining⊅chaining⊈chaining⊉chaining⩵works as ==⩶chainingASCII spellings (3)
These are the ones that matter: an ordinary spelling the interpreter cannot parse at all.