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 ⁄ / | \

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”.

How did the pre US Civil War southern fire- eaters manage to so wildly miscalculate the consequences of secession?

a b i 1 x []

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

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

How can I showcase AI usage, like OpenAI or Claude AI, in my job application process?

in structures, such as:

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.

+ for

What are the potential implications of Meta withholding its multimodal AI models from the EU amid regulatory uncertainty?

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

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

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

June's full 'Strawberry Moon' illuminates the night sky next week: Here's how to see it - Space

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

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