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?

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

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.

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

Walkoff caps ‘unreal 24 hours’ for Mariners’ Cole Young - Seattle Sports

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Re-ranking the 16 super regional teams in the 2025 NCAA baseball tournament - NCAA.com

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

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

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”.

Does meth make women super horny like it does men?

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

in structures, such as:

a b i 1 x []

What do you think of a parent telling their adult child to “keep their personal life to themselves” in relation to talking to them? No reason they should say that it was mean what should I do?

+ for

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.