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?

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

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

a b i 1 x []

Former Packers WR makes long touchdown in UFL championship - Acme Packing Company

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

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

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.

Tony Awards Up 38% From 2024 To Draw Best Audience In 6 Years On CBS - Deadline

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

+ 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.

How can Substack help creators with their overall business strategy?

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

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

in structures, such as:

What does it mean when I have a dream where my friend died? I had this dream last night where one of my friends died in a shootout and I woke up crying.

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, […])