a - b >> 100 * x * sqrt y >> x ** 2 >> 50 * >> + >> + ;
That's a mix of infix and postfix. I don't think writing code like that will be very readable for most people. Humans are much more trained for prefix and infix notations, than for postfix stack operations. We don't see widespread usage of postfix notations in programming languages besides languages like Forth, Postscript or Factor.
The Lisp notation has a different reason why it has been invented: it is based on a data structure around nested lists of symbols. That's a very simple and powerful model. code is written as data. Lisp programmers find the code as data idea attractive. Without that, Lisp would have kept the original idea of a conventional syntax.
> Humans are much more trained for prefix and infix notations
Non-programmers are not trained for prefix notation. Only Lisp programmers use prefix notation for mathematics, so I don't believe your assertion has much evidence to show for it.
> The Lisp notation has a different reason why it has been invented
Yes, and that reason was not readability. That's what I am trying to show.
> code is written as data
Which is great fun, but most programmers don't need or want that.
; Yes, and that reason was not readability. That's what I am trying to show.
Not convincing so far. It turned out that the notation was the most practical (writing, reading, manipulating) for its purpose, otherwise the original syntax would have been used.
> Which is great fun, but most programmers don't need or want that.
The Lisp notation has a different reason why it has been invented: it is based on a data structure around nested lists of symbols. That's a very simple and powerful model. code is written as data. Lisp programmers find the code as data idea attractive. Without that, Lisp would have kept the original idea of a conventional syntax.