> Another application are macros around for loops, like FOREACH_FOO(...) or SCOPED_LOCK(...) for example. This is the exact case where full macros can deliver

> Another application are macros around for loops, like FOREACH_FOO(...) or SCOPED_LOCK(...) for example. This is the exact case where full macros can deliver a lot more power, more cleanly, than preprocessor macros. In this case, in Neat, you'd probably use a full parser macro rather than a call macro, and you could recognize arbitrary syntax, without allowing you to violate parenthesis order like C does. Your macro can do whatever it wants, but it cannot conflict with other, preexisting syntax, such as (in C) defining half a loop or half a variable declaration. This way, it can fully own its syntax. > Expecting code to be so clean, always from the beginning, that all macros one would need ever can always be defined by syntactically complete expression bodys, that is not going to work. Correct, however the example syntax was a simplification of macros. Fundamentally, there's no reason a macro shouldn't be able to do anything that the compiler itself can do.