It ultimately depends on how they're written. println! is a macro, and doesn't "break the tooling". on the other end of the spectrum, using a crate like demonstrate (unit testing) produces hard to understand errors and slows down the IDE.

I don't remember experiencing Rust Analyzer crashes for a long time, though (I do remember some in the past).

This also supports conditional expressions and loops:

https://maud.lambda.xyz/control-structures.html

SGML (the markup meta-language once used for describing HTML) has that, but as we're talking the verdict is still out whether that's actually easier [1] ;) But anyway, SGML gives you HTML-aware, context-dependent, injection-free templating (even with hard support for sanitizing user content) in a content authoring workflow independent from a hosting programming language so is in a different ball park.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31637910

Is there any? I don't think there is a real meaning to "understanding rust macros", as they define something completely new.

You can't build an IDE that definitely just "understands Rust macros" since procedural macros in particular are in effect modifying your compiler. Maud is a proc macro.

Mara's whichever_compiles! macro for example: https://github.com/m-ou-se/whichever-compiles -- that macro is forking your compiler to try out all the branches and throwing away branches which caused a compile error.

Clearly your IDE should throw its hands up and say, I don't understand what this does, I give up.

In general doing something useful with Rust macros is a more tractable problem for an IDE than say the C pre-processor, because Rust's macros have a stronger syntax, but the proc macro is potentially much too powerful / dangerous to try to evaluate.