Constants within array of structs causes strange compiler errors? In my sketch I have the following:

#define HU_ADDR                 0x190;
#define ALL_AUDIO_ADDR          0x1FF;
#define MY_ADDR                 0x360;
#define UNKNOWN_ADDR            0xFFF;

typedef byte MessageID;
enum {
  ACT_UNKNOWN,
  ACT_POWERON,
  ACT_POWEROFF,
  ACT_PASSIVEOFF_0,
  ACT_PASSIVEOFFRARE_0,
  ACT_PASSIVEON_0,
  ACT_KEYTURN,
  ACT_PRESSDISC
};

struct MessageDef {
  MessageID ID;
  word MasterAddr;
  word SlaveAddr;
  byte PayloadLength;
  byte Payload[20];
  char Description[20];
};

MessageDef MessageTable[] = {
  {ACT_POWERON,           HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 13,  {0x00, 0x60, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x01, 0x01, 0x81, 0x00, 0x03, 0x01, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00},                   "On call"},
  {ACT_POWEROFF,          HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 13,  {0x00, 0x60, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x00, 0x00, 0x81, 0x00, 0x03, 0x01, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00},                   "off?"},
  {ACT_PASSIVEOFF_0,      HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 3,   {0x00, 0x11, 0x01},                                                                               "Passive: Weak"},
  {ACT_PASSIVEOFFRARE_0,  HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 4,   {0x00, 0x11, 0x01, 0x20},                                                                         "Passive: Strong"}, 
  {ACT_PASSIVEON_0,       HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 16,  {0x00, 0x74, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x80, 0x13, 0x10, 0x10, 0x10, 0x10, 0x10, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x03, 0x03}, "On response"},
  {ACT_KEYTURN,           HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 11,  {0x31, 0x62, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x00, 0xF8, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0x00},                               "Key turned"}, 
  {ACT_PRESSDISC,         HU_ADDR, UNKNOWN_ADDR, 4,   {0x00, 0x62, 0x31, 0x9F},                                                                         "DISC pressed"}
};


When I compile this, for some reason the Arduino IDE points at the first line and says "expected '}' before ';' token". If I replace the text like so:

#define HU_ADDR                 0x190;
#define ALL_AUDIO_ADDR          0x1FF;
#define MY_ADDR                 0x360;
#define UNKNOWN_ADDR            0xFFF;

typedef byte MessageID;
enum {
  ACT_UNKNOWN,
  ACT_POWERON,
  ACT_POWEROFF,
  ACT_PASSIVEOFF_0,
  ACT_PASSIVEOFFRARE_0,
  ACT_PASSIVEON_0,
  ACT_KEYTURN,
  ACT_PRESSDISC
};

struct MessageDef {
  MessageID ID;
  word MasterAddr;
  word SlaveAddr;
  byte PayloadLength;
  byte Payload[20];
  char Description[20];
};

MessageDef MessageTable[] = {
  {ACT_POWERON,           0x190, 0xFFF, 13,  {0x00, 0x60, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x01, 0x01, 0x81, 0x00, 0x03, 0x01, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00},                   "On call"},
  {ACT_POWEROFF,          0x190, 0xFFF, 13,  {0x00, 0x60, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x00, 0x00, 0x81, 0x00, 0x03, 0x01, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00},                   "off?"},
  {ACT_PASSIVEOFF_0,      0x190, 0xFFF, 3,   {0x00, 0x11, 0x01},                                                                               "Passive: Weak"},
  {ACT_PASSIVEOFFRARE_0,  0x190, 0xFFF, 4,   {0x00, 0x11, 0x01, 0x20},                                                                         "Passive: Strong"}, 
  {ACT_PASSIVEON_0,       0x190, 0xFFF, 16,  {0x00, 0x74, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x80, 0x13, 0x10, 0x10, 0x10, 0x10, 0x10, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x03, 0x03}, "On response"},
  {ACT_KEYTURN,           0x190, 0xFFF, 11,  {0x31, 0x62, 0x31, 0xF1, 0x00, 0xF8, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0x00},                               "Key turned"}, 
  {ACT_PRESSDISC,         0x190, 0xFFF, 4,   {0x00, 0x62, 0x31, 0x9F},                                                                         "DISC pressed"}
};


Then it compiles with no complaints.
....what? Why? Aren't these functionally identical? Why does the compiler care if I use HU_ADDR instead of 0x190?
Don't put a semi-colon at the end of #define.

Whatever comes after #define NAME will be used to replace NAME across the source code.