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 ⁄ / | \

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

Horoscope for Tuesday, 6/10/25 by Christopher Renstrom - SFGATE

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

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

a b i 1 x []

Rents fall in most U.S. metros since 2023 as demand struggles to keep up with supply - Seeking Alpha

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

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.

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”.

The best time to see the Milky Way is fast approaching! How to see our galaxy at its best in June. - Live Science

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

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.

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Do you think that drug addiction is a symptom of larger societal ills? What is it about our culture that leaves so many feeling like they're inadequate, trying any ill to find a cure?

+ for

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