Spurious syntax errors when adding conditions to FlowField CalcFormula expression: "'FIELD', 'CONST' or 'FILTER' keyword is expected."

Describe the bug
Prepending a new condition to a FlowField's CalcFormula results in a false syntax error, and I have to then go and re-type a different part of the pre-existing code to dismiss that.

To Reproduce

1. Have a FlowField with a CalcFormula containing 1 (or more) condition(2)
2. Go to just after the where(, type a space, then go before that, and add a new condition (having the space after means Intellisense works, etc.)
3. Observe the spurious errors reported:

'FIELD', 'CONST' or 'FILTER' keyword is expected. AL(AL0292) [17, 78]
Syntax error, ')' expected AL(AL0104) [17, 83]
Syntax error, ')' expected AL(AL0104) [17, 83]

minimal sample:

table 50100 Foo
{
    fields
    {
        field(1; "Entry No."; Integer)
        {
        }

        field(2; "Customer No."; Code[20])
        {
        }

        field(3; "No. of Customers"; Integer)
        {
            FieldClass = FlowField;
            Editable = false;
            CalcFormula = count(Customer where("No." = field("Customer No.")));
            // Edit the above to add the following and observe: Blocked = const(" "), 
            // CalcFormula = count(Customer where(Blocked = const(" "), "No." = field("Customer No.")));
        }
    }

    keys
    {
        key(PK; "Entry No.")
        {
            Clustered = true;
        }
    }
}

Expected behavior
This is yet another waste of developers' time, where the background/realtime code analysis fires errors that aren't really errors, and we have to re-enter/cut/paste/whatever the same code just to get rid of those wrongly reported errors.

See also e.g. #6225, #6232, #6276

Screenshots

This is the exact scenario where I first noticed this bug.

Original code before adding condition:

after adding condition, reporting spurious error:

after fixing said error by deleting and retyping the 'offending' field keyword...

This is the same false error with the minimal code given above:

after retyping field:

5. Versions:

• AL Language: 6.1.362735

• Business Central: n/a

Reproduce the issue in the minimal AL table sample using the AL Language extension version 6.1.362735. Start by inspecting the diagnostics produced while inserting a condition at the beginning of the FlowField CalcFormula where clause. Done means adding the condition no longer produces spurious AL0292 or AL0104 errors, while valid syntax errors remain reported.