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?
Last Updated: 25.06.2025 15:38
A slogan that might help you get past the current fads is:
i.e. “operator like things” at the nodes …
/ \ and ⁄ / | \
Shane Bieber Suffers Potential Setback In Elbow Rehab - MLB Trade Rumors
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!
a b i 1 x []
What is the best music album of all time?
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.
in structures, such as:
Do you agree with Elon Musk's direction for the US Office of Personnel Management?
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
plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])
Most coding assistants — with or without “modern “AI” — also do reasoning and manipulation of structures.
+ for
Another canonical form could be Lisp S-expressions, etc.