So this code (from https://github.com/axch/test-manager/blob/c4fc3224e873716c58b07ffd35b38ad6c9881e87/ordered-map.scm#L32-L38 https://github.com/axch/test-manag

So this code (from https://github.com/axch/test-manager/blob/c4fc3224e873716c58b07ffd35b38ad6c9881e87/ordered-map.scm#L32-L38 https://github.com/axch/test-manager/blob/c4fc3224e873716c58...) (define-record-type omap-entry (make-omap-entry key item next prev) omap-entry? (key omap-entry-key set-omap-entry-key!) (item omap-entry-item set-omap-entry-item!) (next omap-entry-next set-omap-entry-next!) (prev omap-entry-prev set-omap-entry-prev!)) would be written like this? (define-record-type omap-entry make-omap-entry key item next prev. omap-entry?, key omap-entry-key set-omap-entry-key!. item omap-entry-item set-omap-entry-item!. next omap-entry-next set-omap-entry-next!. prev omap-entry-prev set-omap-entry-prev!) (To mark `omap-entry?` as being a value, not the S-expression `(omap-entry?)`, I decided to place a comma after it instead of a period. The alternative is requiring no punctuation and making newlines significant.) Well, I suppose it does look better. However, the idea is of limited applicability. While looking through the example project (https://github.com/axch/test-manager https://github.com/axch/test-manager), I had trouble finding some code where this would actually be useful – most code has too much nesting. That’s why I prefer another solution for removing excess parens from Lisp syntax: making whitespace significant. It improves the syntax in cases where your periods would help, and it applies in additional cases as well. “Sweet-expressions” (http://readable.sourceforge.net/ http://readable.sourceforge.net/) is an implementation of that. Here is the above code ran through the `sweeten` tool to convert it to sweet-expressions: define-record-type omap-entry make-omap-entry key item next prev omap-entry? key omap-entry-key set-omap-entry-key! item omap-entry-item set-omap-entry-item! next omap-entry-next set-omap-entry-next! prev omap-entry-prev set-omap-entry-prev! Absolutely no parentheses necessary, while still preserving homoiconicity. You don’t even have to remember the `)` at the end of the last nested line. And I chose this example code to look good with your idea – when the code has more nesting, sweet-expressions look even better. About the interrogative mood `?` you describe: it might simplify `if` statements. But that would require removing the convention where boolean-returning functions have a name ending in `?`, such as `omap-entry?` in the example. It’s a tradeoff.