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?

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

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”.

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Anthropologists map Neanderthals' long and winding roads across Europe and Eurasia - Phys.org

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

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.

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

I am 26 now. I have wasted my 4 years of my life on government job preparation. I had put all my effort to get a job, but did not succeed. What should I do now?

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

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

in structures, such as:

US lawmakers fire back a response to Trump's NASA cuts - theregister.com

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

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.

Nintendo Switch 2 owners urged not to skip crucial step setting up their new consoles - GAMINGbible

a b i 1 x []

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