Conversation

@lthms @otini lispy nature does not exclude an advance type systems. We could have a Lisp flavored Haskell or OCaml.

There is also http://shenlanguage.org/ with static type checking based on sequent calculus or gradually typed flavors like https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/

_Personally_ I prefer lack of syntax. Even trivial syntax elements like ‘$’ give unnecessary headaches to newcomers wanting to configure XMonad.

Lisp’s default lack of operator precedence also gives us less rules and less complexity.