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?

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

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

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

Any straight men had a gay experience in the past? What was it and how did you feel?

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”.

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.

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

Homesellers now outnumber buyers by half a million: Redfin - NewsNation

a b i 1 x []

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

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.

What is the story of how you met your spouse?

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

in structures, such as:

+ for

Northern Lights Alert: 8 States May See Aurora Borealis Monday Night - Forbes

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

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