I've got this theory that what people actually don't like about Lisp parentheses is not the amount of nesting, nor the opening paren's prefix location, but rath

I've got this theory that what people actually don't like about Lisp parentheses is not the amount of nesting, nor the opening paren's prefix location, but rather that parentheses always include a hard nesting apply (or really, the syntax layer equivalent of a hard nesting list). In other words - most programmers are used to having an assertion that ((foo)) (foo) and foo are all equivalent, and also assume the basic top-level production is already some kind of list (not a single expression). Lisp breaks these long-loved assumptions. Writing Haskell feels quite Lispy in that the basic syntax is quite generic, but you can nest parentheses all day long without changing the meaning, or even use some generic operators ($, .) to write out a structure in a clearer way. I'd love to see an attempt at a Lisp syntax that felt similarly. (And yes, I know there have been 2^37 attempts at different Lisp syntaxes, but I still haven't found one in line with this idea)