What are your thoughts on a future where code is represented as a structured model, rather than text? Do you think that AI-powered coding assistants benefit from that?

a b i 1 x []

A slogan that might help you get past the current fads is:

i.e. “operator like things” at the nodes …

Is the Trump-Zelenskyy meeting a preview of what the US is going to do to Taiwan?

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

It’s important to realize that “modern “AI” doesn’t understand human level meanings any better today (in many cases: worse!). So it is not going to be able to serve as much of a helper in a general coding assistant.

Another canonical form could be Lisp S-expressions, etc.

Scientists uncover kidney-to-brain route for Parkinson’s-related protein spread - PsyPost

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

Most coding assistants — with or without “modern “AI” — also do reasoning and manipulation of structures.

Long ago in the 50s this was even thought of as a kind of “AI” and this association persisted into the 60s. Several Turing Awards were given for progress on this kind of “machine reasoning”.

How does Taylor Swift make sure that she doesn’t show her uterus to her audience and fans?

+ for

These structures are made precisely to allow programs to “reason” about some parts of lower level meaning, and in many cases to rearrange the structure to preserve meaning but to make the eventual code that is generated more efficient.

in structures, such as:

Abby Lee Miller Sues Cedars-Sinai Hospital, Claims Doctors Left Catheter in Her Body - TMZ

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

First, it’s worth noting that the “syntax recognition” phase of most compilers already does build a “structured model”, often in what used to be called a “canonical form” (an example of this might be a “pseudo-function tree” where every elementary process description is put into the same form — so both “a + b” and “for i := 1 to x do […]” are rendered as