I would like to note that syntax like this is in heavy use in the Code Golf community (a sport in which the aim is to write the shortest code possible to complete a particular task).

It will be disappointing if it becomes an error and break many past programs (you can search for phrases like `1and`, `0for` on https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/search?q=0for for examples).

I could understand if this change remains because code golf is not exactly an important thing with serious ramifications, but I think it should be taken in to consideration as a use-case nonetheless.