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?

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

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

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

Nutritionists reveal the surprising health benefits of maple syrup, including less belly fat - Earth.com

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”.

+ for

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Would deporting illegal aliens alleviate the housing crisis?

a b i 1 x []

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

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.

If you were president, how would you make America "great again?"

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

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

in structures, such as:

My boyfriend wants to break up over too many petty arguments. To me, they are molehills because I truly love him & don't really think twice about them. If he loved me would he work through it?

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.

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])