I&#x27;m curious about this point from the article:<p>&gt; And alternative syntaxes (Lisps without parens) have faultered since they sacrifice some of Lisp&#x27;s power that seasoned users aren&#x27;t willing to part with.<p>Could Elixer be an example of one of these Lisps without parens? [1] Can anyone give an example of what kinds of Lisp powers are sacrificed in a syntax where the parens are implicit rather than explicit? I can&#x27;t think of anything off the top of my head.<p>It seems to me that Parinfer, when working as intended, almost turns a regular Lisp <i>into</i> one of these parenless Lisps, by performing parens manipulation for us, which in turn allows us to treat whatever Lisp we&#x27;re working with as if it was a parenless Lisp.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.8thlight.com&#x2F;patrick-gombert&#x2F;2013&#x2F;11&#x2F;26&#x2F;lispy-elixir.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.8thlight.com&#x2F;patrick-gombert&#x2F;2013&#x2F;11&#x2F;26&#x2F;lispy-e...</a>