Very interesting language, but so difficult to read. Something about the undifferentiated sea of lowercase letters just makes my eyes glaze over. People say it gets easier as you use it, but I never managed to get there.
This style also encourages blocks to be compact so they almost fit right into your fovea. The spread-out "C" style that emphasizes the curly braces on their own line seems so backwards, emphasizing precisely the thing you don't care about.
Really? I like the curly braces on their own line precisely because that's what I do care about. I want to see the block structure - the context, if you will - before I think about the individual lines.
But the jury is still out whether using indentations instead of syntactic markers is a good choice for a programming language.
The symbols are meaningless by themselves, except that the same symbol can be used in multiple places. BUT the syntactic structure of a program is NOT meaningless. It in fact defines the "meaning" of the program - in as far as the symbols used are arbitrary.
Therefore if you can express the program structure separately from the symbols, you make the program easier to comprehend.
Nowadays, indentation does a bunch of heavy lifting when it comes to readability. Modern Lisp-inspired languages (such as Clojure, but also some dialects of Scheme) also use other symbols in addition to parenthesis (like square brackets). Usually they are interchangeable, but I found that it can sometimes help.
I find it difficult to read LOOP macros. And some versions of LET. But they are bastions of readability if you compare with languages like_c<with<templates>>(T) and_macros(void);{}
Like prose? Books have not many symbols nor syntax highlighting. You have to read the actual words to know what it's talking about.
Honestly, I would understand criticising the noise of parens. Not of their contents.