nesting := 0
	var tokens []Token
	for {
		tok := in.Stack.Next()
		if tok == scanner.EOF || tok == '\n' {
			in.Error("unterminated arg list invoking macro:", macro.name)
		}
		if nesting == 0 && (tok == ')' || tok == ',') {
			return tokens, tok
		}
		if tok == '(' {
			nesting++
		}
		if tok == ')' {
			nesting--
		}

 * session events and their originating operations in the application code. The trace structure
 * supports the following key features:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>Maintains parent-child relationships between requests to track operation nesting</li>
 *   <li>Carries contextual data describing the current request or operation</li>
 *   <li>Supports both internal session operations and client-provided trace information</li>
 * </ul>
 *

			if tok == '\n' || tok == ';' || (nesting == 0 && (tok == ',' || tok == ':')) {
				if tok == ':' {
					// Remember this location so we can swap the operands below.
					if colon >= 0 {
						p.errorf("invalid ':' in operand")
						return word, cond, operands, true
					}
					colon = len(operands)
				}
				break
			}
			if tok == '(' || tok == '[' {
				nesting++
			}
			if tok == ')' || tok == ']' {

      function = null;
    }

    /*
     * If set()/setValue() throws an Error, we let it propagate. Why? The most likely Error is a
     * StackOverflowError (from deep transform(..., directExecutor()) nesting), and calling
     * setException(stackOverflowError) would fail:
     *
     * - If the stack overflowed before set()/setValue() could even store the result in the output

      function = null;
    }

    /*
     * If set()/setValue() throws an Error, we let it propagate. Why? The most likely Error is a
     * StackOverflowError (from deep transform(..., directExecutor()) nesting), and calling
     * setException(stackOverflowError) would fail:
     *
     * - If the stack overflowed before set()/setValue() could even store the result in the output

   *   <li>{@code ImmutableList.of(2, "C")}
   * </ul>
   *
   * <p>The result is guaranteed to be in the "traditional", lexicographical order for Cartesian
   * products that you would get from nesting for loops:
   *
   * {@snippet :
   * for (B b0 : lists.get(0)) {
   *   for (B b1 : lists.get(1)) {
   *     ...
   *     ImmutableList<B> tuple = ImmutableList.of(b0, b1, ...);
   *     // operate on tuple

 *      * response ([responseFailed])
 *        * headers ([responseHeadersStart], [responseHeadersEnd])
 *        * body ([responseBodyStart], [responseBodyEnd])
 *
 * This nesting is typical but not strict. For example, when calls use "Expect: continue" the
 * request body start and end events occur within the response header events. Similarly,

 * <ul>
 *   <li>for an unnested {@code lock()} and {@code unlock()}, a cycle detecting lock takes 38ns as
 *       opposed to the 24ns taken by a plain lock.
 *   <li>for nested locking, the cost increases with the depth of the nesting:
 *       <ul>
 *         <li>2 levels: average of 64ns per lock()/unlock()
 *         <li>3 levels: average of 77ns per lock()/unlock()
 *         <li>4 levels: average of 99ns per lock()/unlock()

   *   <li>{@code ImmutableList.of(2, "C")}
   * </ul>
   *
   * <p>The result is guaranteed to be in the "traditional", lexicographical order for Cartesian
   * products that you would get from nesting for loops:
   *
   * {@snippet :
   * for (B b0 : sets.get(0)) {
   *   for (B b1 : sets.get(1)) {
   *     ...
   *     ImmutableList<B> tuple = ImmutableList.of(b0, b1, ...);

 * <ul>
 *   <li>for an unnested {@code lock()} and {@code unlock()}, a cycle detecting lock takes 38ns as
 *       opposed to the 24ns taken by a plain lock.
 *   <li>for nested locking, the cost increases with the depth of the nesting:
 *       <ul>
 *         <li>2 levels: average of 64ns per lock()/unlock()
 *         <li>3 levels: average of 77ns per lock()/unlock()
 *         <li>4 levels: average of 99ns per lock()/unlock()