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?

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

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”.

If you're quitting a job or anticipating layoffs, don't burn your bridges at work. Boomerang hires are increasing. - Business Insider

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

+ 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.

Do you agree with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that it is unrealistic to expect Ukraine to return to its pre-2014 borders?

a b i 1 x []

in structures, such as:

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

A cardiologist overhauled his diet to boost his longevity. Here's the grocery store path he takes to stick to his meal plan and avoid bad foods. - Business Insider

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

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

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

What is your young sex story?

/ \ 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.