S-exprs are a degenerate case of XML

<s-exp>defun foo <s-exp>x</s-exp>
<s-exp>let <s-exp>y <s-exp>1+ x</s-exp></s-exp></s-exp>
<s-exp>format t "y = ~d" y</s-exp></s-exp>

>>21
It wasn't me who said they're equivalent, it was this guy: >>18

It should be obvious that two encodings of trees are equivalent

>>23
But nigger music is not equivalent to classical. Sexps, on the other hand, are equivalent to XML and arguably (which means there's got to be lots of people who take the side of Sexp) better-looking. No fucking <></></><> everywhere, just the smallest and most reasonable separators - the parentheses and the spaces. Sexps are like XML done right. So why does everyone insist on the <><><><> shit?