RE: [External] : Definition of a sexp

[uzibalqa via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]

On Thursday, January 9th, 2025 at 11:54 AM, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> wrote:

> > Can one then state that a sexp is either a balanced parenthetical
> > grouping, a string, or a symbol, that is subject to evaluation?
> 
> 
> I already told you what a sexp is, and why "basically"
> is used there - it just means there that those are
> important kinds of sexps.
> 
> IOW, that's not an exhaustive list. It might have added
> "a number" and "a vector" to the list, as other important
> kinds of atom.

Right.  "Not an exhaustive list" is much more informative and precise
that "basically".   Some difficulties in the docs is that 
 
> What "basically" does NOT mean there is that there are
> lists, strings, or symbols that aren't sexps. Of course
> you can pick nits such as representations of lists,
> strings, and symbols within comments or inside strings,...
> 
> A sexp is a cons or an atom. That's the whole story.
> Read the rest of what I wrote or pointed you to, if you
> want details.

Good