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 03:19
A slogan that might help you get past the current fads is:
a b i 1 x []
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.
Why are FtM trans just another type of woman?
Another canonical form could be Lisp S-expressions, etc.
+ for
NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!
The Verge’s guide to Amazon Prime Day 2025: best deals, tips, and tricks - The Verge
i.e. “operator like things” at the nodes …
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, […])
Roman Anthony joining Red Sox on Monday; No. 1 prospect gets call to majors - MassLive
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:
Most coding assistants — with or without “modern “AI” — also do reasoning and manipulation of structures.
Hate iOS 26's Liquid Glass Design? Here's How to Tone It Down - MacRumors
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
/ \ and ⁄ / | \