[nem-en] macro to define a new kind of member

[Kamil Dworakowski]

Kamil Skalski wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to make your macro with target as field and use
> it as something like:
>
> class {
>  pointcut (balbla) public name;
> }
Not anymore, once we have class targeted macros inside class. Now I can 
have exactly (except for the modifiers) the same syntax as in aspectj.
> On the other hand I like the idea of "within class" extensions, but I
> don't see any elegant way to make it consume modifiers (besides having
> raw token stream as parameter)
I think I'll do it. In the ParseClassMember() the custom attributes are 
readily available as a list[Token.SquareGroup] whereas the modifiers can 
be copied from the token stream.

Kamil Dworakowski