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?

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

in structures, such as:

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

What does it mean when someone tells you they love you and want you in their life, but doesn't want to commit?

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

a b i 1 x []

Do you think it is likely that Maegor was presented a young dragon at some point, almost to the point of full-bonding, only to scorn it for Balerion in the end? If so, which one could it have been?

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”.

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

U.S. budget deficit hit $316 billion in May, with annual shortfall up 14% from a year ago - CNBC

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.

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

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.

Have you ever seen your wife being fucked?

+ for

/ \ and ⁄ / | \