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?

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

a b i 1 x []

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

Do individuals with borderline personality disorder have awareness of their actions or do they believe their behavior is normal?

+ for

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.

Pharmacy Mixes Up 9-Year-Old’s ADHD Medicine, Gives Him Opioid More Powerful Than Morphine - AOL.com

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.

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

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

How do military families handle communication when a service member is injured overseas?

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”.

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

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

What is a good way to conduct an interview?

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