>> I guess I think we can do much better than "smart typewriter" as a way to interact with executable data. > The interface provided by Lisp is way different f

>> I guess I think we can do much better than "smart typewriter" as a way to interact with executable data. > The interface provided by Lisp is way different from Smalltalk and opens up a fully new perspective: computing of code. I suppose my point is that the s-expressions are an illusion - it's been a powerful tool to let people see you can, as you say "compute code", which I see as a proxy for "compute logic" (where "code" is a string, and logic is executable). Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree - but I think the surface syntax allow "logic" to masquerade as "text representation" - while really being opaque binary streams - and that little is gained by holding on to them on general principle. Not nothing; they certainly remain a useful representation - but like lisp shows with prefix and infix notation (quote and dot/pair) - there's really not that to be gained by such ungainly syntax.