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?

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

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

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

If I want to grow muscles, is taking creatine a must or can I take whey protein only?

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.

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

in structures, such as:

Consequuntur dolor explicabo ipsa autem vel eos et.

+ for

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

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

Why do people who aren't trans feel the need to put pronouns next to their name or picture? It seems so cringeworthy to me, to participate in that SJW paradigm of thought, like they are a spineless person who just goes along with the trends.

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

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”.

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.

Why was the rock band Kiss so successful?

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

a b i 1 x []