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?

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

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”.

a b i 1 x []

What are some interview experiences with JP Morgan India?

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

in structures, such as:

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

Regarding red light therapy I have been doing it for almost 10 months now. With wonderful results for my skin. I do it 6 days a week for 20 minutes at a time. My question is when can I cut down when can I do less and still maintain results?

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

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

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

Food and fitness make or break success on weight loss meds, report finds - ABC News

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

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.

+ for

What are some good books on AI ethics?

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

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.