The next generation compiler

It has come to my attention that current C compilers compile C to assembly and then assembles and links the assembly code. What about a new type of compiler, which just develops an intuition on how to generate the raw binary. I'm thinking of creating the next generation C compiler, it's a trained neural network which compiles by intuition rather than preset assembly instructions. It should probably compile code much faster than current C compilers and we can market it as organic and natural since it's just like a C compiling animal as opposed to the current compiler robots.

What do you think /prog/?

>>17
I know, although it's more like retrieving and storing cached thoughts. What I was claiming is that humans are too SLOW to be compilers (or neural networks of that architecture) and computers are too SLOW to be humans. It sounds paradoxical, but it's not, CPUs are designed to run a sequential stream of instructions fast, they do this by implementing the CPU in extremly fast parallel circuits/cells, human brains are a physical architecture implemented in neurons which are rather slow compared to normal electronics, but the sheer size and actual path lengths (maximum depth is some 20 neurons or so for 1 second (that is, it takes 1 second for information to pass from one neuron to another, and this path is 20 neurons wide; in practice the whole network is activated, information is passed through the entire network, not just a single path), but I'll need to find the exact citations on that).

tl;dr: Humans are good at performing certain types of tasks requirng general intelligence. CPUs are good at performing preprogrammed tasks much faster than any human could. Compilation is one such task. A human is not a good CPU (way too slow). A CPU is most certainly not a good human (way too slow). The architectures have different "purposes" (humans don't have a purpose, but they are an adaptation which resulted in general intelligence, which aids them in surviving and much more).