Try writing out typical mathematical formula derivations using only s-expressions. I tried for a period and abandoned the persuit. It’s just not comparable to established mathematical notation.
Two solutions. Threading macros wherein instead of nested parens like (x (y (z))) one writes
((->> z)
y
x)
In clojure there is an interesting package https://github.com/rplevy/swiss-arrows which allows one to perform successive operations with explicit placement of the result of prior evaluation by placing a <> in the form
((->> (z <>))
(y <> 7)
(x <>))
In practice it seems like there is often less need to do so as many similar functions or the same variety have the same ordering and other options like as-> exist too.
There is also the idea of processing math expressions infix as expected when desired.
The Lisp community has literally tried exactly this, on and off, for the past half century -- and they always come back to s-expressions. Every new Lisp programmers says "I know, I'll make a macro to let me write infix math!", and then abandons it 2 months later. It's not like Lisp programmers aren't aware of how schoolchildren write (+ 2 2).
I've written tons of code in both language families. In infix/prefix (i.e., Algol-family) languages, I frequently wish for a nice consistent prefix syntax. In prefix-only (i.e., Lisp-family) languages, I can't say I've ever wished for infix notation.
I don't understand what the perceived issue is with infix notation, except for unfamiliarity -- and that passes soon enough.
