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 ⁄ / | \

a b i 1 x []

+ for

The International Boxing Association said that Khelif and Lin competing in Paris Olympics were disqualified from the tournament for testing positive for XY chromosomes which give an unfair advantage in the women’s division. What do you think?

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.

How did you as a human being change while growing up?

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:

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

Exclusive Trump interview: A big steel deal for Pennsylvania - Washington Examiner

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”.

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:

What are the coolest new smart home gadgets to upgrade your living space?

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

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