> So instead of f(x), I have to accept the visual noise and extra characters of (f x)?
(f x) and f(x) have the exact same number of characters; one mans'visual noise' is another's 'visual clarity'
(f x) and f(x) have the exact same number of characters; one mans'visual noise' is another's 'visual clarity'
Also if you think parens and prefix notation are so great, would you also like to see math papers written that way?
The S-exp can be shortened in anything calling itself a Lisp, using the unary reciprocal: (+ (/ 2) 5).
Math papers are full of obscure notations; they should standardize on s-exps. Then just a straightforward dictionary of symbols would be needed to look up a notation.
Math notation is at least 2D: it makes good use of spatial structures to reduce ambiguity. For instance, instead of inventing some crazy ternary operator, mathematicians will just arrange three arguments spatially around a symbol. The space subdivides recursively, so elements end up being positionally determined, somewhat like what S-exps do in 1D.
That being said, a lot of mathematical notation is pretty close to lisp syntax, basically anything that works like sigma.
x
z+w
y op ---
s+t