>>What is really the meaningful difference between this and an s-expression language? >Turing completeness. S-expressions in and of themselves are obviously n

>>What is really the meaningful difference between this and an s-expression language? >Turing completeness. S-expressions in and of themselves are obviously not Turing complete. This language could easily have been encoded in S-expressions, just like Lisp can be encoded as JSON. (Like, trivially, as lists with quoted strings instead of atoms, or using whatever object-based syntax.)