> M-expressions happen to be catch-all name They're that, but it's also used to describe a specific syntax. IMO, the more general definition is not particularl

> M-expressions happen to be catch-all name They're that, but it's also used to describe a specific syntax. IMO, the more general definition is not particularly valuable and should be discarded. Because it's just not useful to paint m-expressions, i-expressions, t-expressions, etc. with the same brush like that. Doing so just muddies the waters. If you want a general-purpose term for alternative lisp syntax, why not "alternative lisp syntax?"