Readability is defined by the fact that anyone who understands the language shouldn't need to "know how to read it".
Conventions, style, standards, etc are explicitly created for the purpose of lowering the barrier to entry for understanding and maintaining a piece of code. The maximum number of potential users who can quickly interpret and be productive with said code is the purpose of the concept of readability.
Unless you are claiming a specific advantage for the stylistic choices over simply taking more care to write more conventionally readable code, I don't understand your objection to the term unreadable.
"unreadable" in common parlance of the software world is not taken to mean literally impossible to parse but simply, not optimised for ease accessibility for the maximum number of people in the shortest amount of time. I'm afraid that means that the fact there is debate over this to such an extreme suggests this is at the very least, not very readable.
As with everything, there is a balance required. Unreasonable lengths should not have to be undertaken to maximise code readability. I do wonder what advantages you attribute to this style which you think justifies any potential trade-off in readability? What is gained for such a potential expense?
> Readability is defined by the fact that anyone who understands the language shouldn't need to "know how to read it".
Perhaps then this isn't C, but a language compatible with (at least a few) C compilers.
This language is something you can learn to read as effortlessly as you read other languages (perhaps more so), you simply haven't learned how to read this yet.
If you want to suggest readability is defined in that way and no other, how can someone who does not know this language make a statement about its readability?
I'm not sure I'm convinced with this line of thinking, because it's incredibly exclusionary, just watch:
> I do wonder what advantages you attribute to this style which you think justifies any potential trade-off in [me being unable to read it]? What is gained for such a potential expense?
Why would anyone want your input on something you do not understand?
Why would anyone write in Chinese if you cannot understand Chinese?
What is the point in this kind of definition of "readability"?
Does that make sense? Surely it's much more useful to talk instead about what the capability of the programmer is that can read and write and maintain code written this way, instead of the possible missed opportunities of the programmer that cannot?