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:

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, […])

We finally may be able to rid the world of mosquitoes. But should we? - The Washington Post

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

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

+ for

How the Brain’s RNA Rings Are Formed - Neuroscience News

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.

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

a b i 1 x []

I tried the 6-6-6 walking challenge for a week and my step count skyrocketed - Fit&Well

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.

in structures, such as:

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

This Simple Dietary Trick Could Improve Your Sleep in 24 Hours - SciTechDaily

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

/ \ and ⁄ / | \