Well,<p>code&#x2F;data duality = homoiconicity<p>There are many languages which do not use sexps but are homoiconic.<p>See &quot;examples&quot; at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Homoiconicity" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Homoiconicity</a><p>Yes, most of the examples look very limited compared to Lisp but there is Rebol &#x2F; Red (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.red-lang.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.red-lang.org&#x2F;</a>) which is atleast as powerful as Lisp in terms of homoiconicity (as well as in other things), if not more. Red&#x2F;Rebol don&#x27;t use sexps, don&#x27;t look like this (((())))), are highly dynamic and homoiconic.<p>See &quot;Homoiconicity in Rebol&quot; in <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Homoiconicity" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Homoiconicity</a>
(well, no good examples over there which shows Rebol&#x27;s features properly.)<p>&gt; RE the learning curve: Do you think the APL family can exist without the terse syntax?<p>So yes, I think that the APL family could exist without the terse syntax, but well hey, everything has its tradeoffs and all this is subjective - everyone has his own thinking - there might be someone in this world who in love with the APL syntax :D