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 []

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.

Why do gun lovers think their right to own a weapon supercedes everyone else's right to be safe and not be shot?

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

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

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

Trump said he was giving Iran a window to come to the table. He struck 2 days later. - ABC News - Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

+ for

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

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.

Apple Knows AI Isn’t What People Really Want, but It Can’t Say That - Gizmodo

in structures, such as:

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

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Junk Food Alert: Our Bodies Treat Ultra-Processed Foods Like Foreign Invaders! - Glass Almanac

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

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”.