> On the other hand, if my editor has to incorporate a full-blown parser for your program's (meta)language in order for me to find where something's defined, th

> On the other hand, if my editor has to incorporate a full-blown parser for your program's (meta)language in order for me to find where something's defined, then maybe your program needs refactored more than my editor needs replaced. Either you want your editor aware of your language's semantics if you don't. I rather do, because it saves a ton of time and basic integrations are usually quite straightforward in 2017. > Or perhaps better documentation on your program's part and/or better education/familiarization on my part is warranted. Barring my opinions on this, I don't get why this would exclude editor semantics. > Most modern editors are able to horizontally scroll and thus handle long lines in source code. That doesn't make a 500-character-long line of code acceptable by any stretch. Okay, but this is a false equivalence. You're telling me not to use metaprogramming tools because they make it hard for a specific editor feature to be used in conjunction with them in the most difficult case for any system (introducing new run-time-dependent lexical bindings into a scoped block and handling that at compile time). But unlike code visibility, in most good solutions exist to work with these systems (within reason).