I don't mean to imply that Lispy languages with non-sexp syntax won't catch on. Python, Ruby and Lua seem to have pretty Lispy semantics, for example. I also do

I don't mean to imply that Lispy languages with non-sexp syntax won't catch on. Python, Ruby and Lua seem to have pretty Lispy semantics, for example. I also do not mean to imply that DSLs or implementations of existing language standards that compile to sexps and get passed to a Lisp runtime to execute won't catch on. I believe Maxima is such a DSL. What I do mean is that a general-purpose replacement syntax for existing Lisps that isn't mainly written in terms of data structure literals won't catch on. Note that I didn't say lists there; Clojure has added vectors and maps to its syntax, but retains a very Lispy overall syntax. I'm not sure if a new language explicitly designed to be a Lisp in everything but front-end syntax will catch on. New languages usually catch on when they present a good solution to a problem lots of people have on a silver platter. They're a lot like startups in that regard.