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?

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

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.

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Meta found 'covertly tracking' Android users through Instagram and Facebook - Sky News

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

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 …

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.

+ for

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”.

Should parents be allowed to bring children into R-rated movies? What are the potential consequences of doing so?

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

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

a b i 1 x []

As an atheist don't you really feel fear for committing sins which are not violating national laws?

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: