Live data from Hacker News

Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

jstoppa.com

11–20 of 83 posts

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#11
My first experience with Cursor: starting it from WSL doesn't work, went down a number of GitHub rabbit holes to fix that one. Then on every update it breaks the original "code" shortcut because it has it's path with both "code" and "cursor" launchers in PATH; it ostensibly gives you the choice to register either or both, but I fail to see how that can work with this setup.

It's actually a nice tool but I'm getting a "you should be a unicorn to fork ~Chrome~ VS Code" vibe.

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#12
post #7

I've been using cursor a bit, I don't know if it's because what I'm doing is not frontend web development but the results have not been as insane as others claim. I really don't have any difficulty creating basic web layouts or forms so an AI assistant doing that for me is nice but it does not transform my work.

I haven't done anything with Cursor that I wouldn't be able to do without it so far, but for me it's made certain tasks _much_ faster.

I have, I wrote a GPU implementation of marching cubes algorithm in GLSL that shows realtime topology viewer of electron density grids by slicing through an electron voxel grid represented as a 3D texture on the GPU.

I dont know GLSL, (but I am very experienced with C/C++/Python), and I wrote this by using cursor and muddling through it, all in one afternoon.

Could I have learnt GLSL and coded it myself, maybe, maybe not. We are at the point now that I was able to produce something commercially useful to my platform in a language I didn't know, in a single afternoon, GLSL is pretty similar to C, but even still, theres a certain threshold of effort and time where "could I have done it with enough time" transforms into "I couldn't have done it", and we are close to that.

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#13
post #7

I've been using cursor a bit, I don't know if it's because what I'm doing is not frontend web development but the results have not been as insane as others claim. I really don't have any difficulty creating basic web layouts or forms so an AI assistant doing that for me is nice but it does not transform my work.

I haven't done anything with Cursor that I wouldn't be able to do without it so far, but for me it's made certain tasks _much_ faster.

Can you give some examples?

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub Copilot already includes open files in the context.

But not the whole repo - Cursor indexes all your files in a vector DB and then can use RAG when querying models. Perhaps the biggest benefit I get from Cursor is that I can ask it questions about the whole repo - when working with a sizable team in a large repo, this is hugely valuable.

Is the data sent to Cursor and the underlying LLM used to train models? This is key, otherwise it's not usable for most orgs.

Copilot can use entire repositories using Copilot enterprise and it's guaranteed none of the data is used for training purposes. https://github.blog/news-insights/product-news/github-copilo...

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#17
post #10
post #5

Something that's been amusing me about Cursor is that I feel a lot of the excitement about it isn't so much about Cursor, it's people realizing that LLMs have got REALLY good at writing code now. GPT-4 was good for the past year, but the latest models (especially Claude 3.5 Sonnet) are spectacular. Those of us who've been copying and pasting LLM-generated code back and forth from ChatGPT and Claude.ai for the past ye…

I would love to see someone on stream use AI really effectively. I really try, but for the life of me, I can’t get AI to generate anything useful beyond simple tests. They’re still autocomplete++ for me.

Autocomplete++ is the killer feature for me, especially for more tedious thingsike SQL column naming.

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#18
post #5

Something that's been amusing me about Cursor is that I feel a lot of the excitement about it isn't so much about Cursor, it's people realizing that LLMs have got REALLY good at writing code now. GPT-4 was good for the past year, but the latest models (especially Claude 3.5 Sonnet) are spectacular. Those of us who've been copying and pasting LLM-generated code back and forth from ChatGPT and Claude.ai for the past ye…

How would you compare GPT-4o with Claude 3.5 Sonnet?

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#19
post #10
post #5

Something that's been amusing me about Cursor is that I feel a lot of the excitement about it isn't so much about Cursor, it's people realizing that LLMs have got REALLY good at writing code now. GPT-4 was good for the past year, but the latest models (especially Claude 3.5 Sonnet) are spectacular. Those of us who've been copying and pasting LLM-generated code back and forth from ChatGPT and Claude.ai for the past ye…

I would love to see someone on stream use AI really effectively. I really try, but for the life of me, I can’t get AI to generate anything useful beyond simple tests. They’re still autocomplete++ for me.

Agreed! But also...

Rather than your seeing someone stream "really effective 99th percentile AI coding", maybe it would be more illustrative for us all to see someone stream the "50th percentile developer unassisted" experience.

I suspect that's the thing we're all missing to help us understand the potential value of AI coding: how slow and ineffectively the median software developer works, bc they just quietly slog away and don't talk much about how they work :)

I humbly include myself on that thought btw

Re: Code Smarter, Not Harder: Developing with Cursor and Claude Sonnet

#20
I’ve been using GitHub Copilot as my daily driver. It is now as indispensable as the Vim extension for VSCode. It doesn't write much new code for me and, frankly, it fails miserably at most tasks. However, it does a phenomenal job with auto-completion. So, while I still feel like I am in the driver's seat, it does help me achieve tremendously more by simply extending what I have already started.

But that should be no surprise. After all, LLMs simply complete the next token in a long sequence of text based on some probability outcome. A lot of the code is a sequence of patterns. So the LLM should be able to do well.

I feel that true coding agents are perhaps around the corner, but it seems to me that we are a couple of innovations away before this happens.

However, even with coding agents, there will be simply more people producing a lot more code (even non developers) which I believe will drive the demand for higher quality code or at least code that can be understood and proved by other humans. Thus, coding agents are just force-multipliers. Great developers will become greater. I wrote something about this here if you are interested: go.cbk.ai/divide. My $0.02.

Post reply on HN