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

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

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

36 Wildly Entitled People From This Month Who Might As Well Have Just Screamed "It's All About ME!" - BuzzFeed

in structures, such as:

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

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

There was this one weird Bollywood movie that was released in the 2000s. Amitabh Bachchan was starring with another actress and the story was about how the old guy (Amitabh Bachchan) fell in love with the young woman. What is the name of this movie?

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

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”.

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 iPhone 17 Pro Max: The Best View Yet Of New Design Just Leaked - Forbes

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.

+ for

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

What sorts of music do cats respond to?

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

a b i 1 x []