I find that alternative syntaxes like this for S-expressions tend to get really awkward when confronted with real-world Lisp code. For example, the following co

I find that alternative syntaxes like this for S-expressions tend to get really awkward when confronted with real-world Lisp code. For example, the following code sample†: (define (pointless-function a z) (let* ((numbers (map (lambda (n) (* n 2)) (range a z))) (multiple-of-three? (lambda (n) (= 0 (mod n 3)))) (multiples-of-three (filter multiple-of-three? numbers))) (printf "Your numbers are: ~s~%" multiples-of-three))) AFAIK, this code only gets noisier when you introduce a paren-free syntax, as you need to introduce hacks to get around the simultaneous necessity and lack of parentheses. † OK, I'll grant you, this function is not at all realistic. But I think the structure of the code is pretty lifelike. I didn't have any Lisp code at hand to use as an example, so I just banged out something that used let and lambda to illustrate that the structure of S-expressions can be pretty intricate.