That's insanity. Sure, code is a nice addition, but it does not convey the same information as the math does.

It's akin to asking to replace an engineer's design of a bridge with a scale model.

As someone who hasn't actively done formal math in a couple of decades the slog of relearning syntax to read papers about code can be off putting. I understand that this makes me a barbarian. However code is really the lingua franca we use as an industry but in papers it is treated exactly as you say a nice addition.

No, because those aim to express the same thing, albeit with different limitations and practical considerations. Code and math are entirely separate things.

> As someone who hasn't actively done formal math in a couple of decades the slog of relearning syntax to read papers about code can be off putting.

Surely the syntax is an incredibly minor part of it all?

> However code is really the lingua franca we use as an industry but in papers it is treated exactly as you say a nice addition.

Code is an implementation detail. Papers express ideas, not implementations.