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?

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.

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

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

Hailee Steinfeld & Josh Allen marry in west coast ceremony - Buffalo Rumblings

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

a b i 1 x []

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

Hailey Bieber Steps Out Solo in an Emerald Minidress After Ditching Her Wedding Ring - instyle.com

+ for

in structures, such as:

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

Rick Carlisle Had Straightforward Explanation for Pacers' Late Struggles in Game 4 - Sports Illustrated

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

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.

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

Is it overstating to say that AI is on a par with the invention of fire, electricity, flight, or the Internet in its ability to transform our lives?

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”.

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