Martin Jambon wrote:
> Otherwise it's possible to define well-disciplined syntax extensions.
> For example, if each new syntax construct (new rule) is forced to start
> with a unique, registered keyword and end with "end", then different
> syntax extensions that follow this rule should play well together.

Except that any new keyword can potentially break existing code. You'd
need some other syntactical convention.

> It would be really nice to have official guidelines on how to develop
> clean syntax extensions, if not automatic enforcement.

Do you have concrete examples of extensions that don't play well together?

-- Alain