Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't know Unix users were not able to use IDEs. The more you know /s Edit : Sarcastic
Not true and if only then by choice. VSCode/Cursor run natively under Linux.
I use VS Code on Fedora Silverblue.
Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
61–70 of 140 posts
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't know Unix users were not able to use IDEs. The more you know /s Edit : Sarcastic
Not true and if only then by choice. VSCode/Cursor run natively under Linux.
It obviously wasn't obvious enough but I was being sarcastic. My fault anyway, pre coffee.
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#63Usually if I want to code a ticket, I'll plan the components out into a TODO list, put some focus music on, and try and enter a flow state where I can stream through the code. Using these AI autocompletes really breaks up that flow for me. So I don't really like the autocomplete stuff. I have found Cursor sort of useful for aiding in refactors, where I need to e.g. refactor dozens of function calls to move to a new g…
Try asking aider or Cursor to read the TODO and work on the items there, then ask it to update a SPEC.md file (which you can also use for context/input). That workflow has been very productive for me in VS Code with agent mode.
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#64I use Claude Code (cli tool) and it's on another level. Not even comparable to code autocomplete à la Copilot or copy/pasting into a LLM chat app. It knows about your whole code base, can use external tools, read documentation, run tests, etc. Even as an experienced developer, it's been a huge productivity boost. The main downside is that it can quickly get expensive.
You get the same experience inside VS Code with Copilot these days, as long as you select agent mode. Yesterday I even asked it to read documentation off a URL and it asked me permission to fetch the page, summarized it, and applied the API changes needed.
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#65I've been using Windsurf for a few weeks. I'm a novice programmer trying to build a web app using React and NextJS. The "context-in-the-codebase" thing for AI-based IDEsis overrated IMO. To extract the most from it, you have to remember to @mention the files. If you don't remember to @mention specific files, the agent simply tries to perform searches (i.e., it has access to that tool) on the files and folders until i…
In VS Code, you automatically get the current file context and you can add all open files, specific files, etc. just before you hit send.
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#66I've finally settled on this: - A custom vscode plugin to help me copy file contents from the tree view, along with file paths - A chat based ide (LibreChat, but anything will do) - An agent that syncs code back, once I'm happy with the conversation ( https://github.com/codespin-ai/codebox ) Sometimes I add the agent right at the beginning. Sometimes I do that when I feel the code is ready to be written back. Another…
Why use an external tool if you now have agent mode in VS Code?
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#67I use copilot through VSCode. The copilot plugin lets me either ask questions or ask for edits to my code. I can choose which files to include as an additional context to the prompt. I can additionally choose which model to use. Some models are unlimited, others have some monthly quota. GPT-4o is unlimited and quite good with short tasks. It has also shortcuts for instance fixing errors in the code by just selecting…
But you aren't just asking for edits to your code, right? Copilot will actively suggest code completion as you type. This is the real benefit over chat as it's like pair programming. That, and the way it generates commit comments, I don't think I will write another commit message even again.
I use VS Code too and in agent mode I can say things like “move the database querias into a new module called models.py and convert the SQL into SQLModel classes”. It’s pretty awesome to do chores.
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#68I started out trying to use my ChatGPT subscription as you describe, but then migrated to Cursor.
It suits my workflow a lot better because I can reject suggestions easily, or accept partial diffs. I can approve certain chunks but instruct it to rethink other parts if I think they are a bad approach. This isn’t possible if you are just copypasting chunks of code back and forth between an IDE and browser window.
As for the cost, you get 500 “fast” requests per month for Premium models. If you use them up, then you can still use the Premium models, but are placed in a queue so have to wait a bit longer (Cursor refers to these as slow requests). I haven’t been in this situation yet, but I am not a super heavy user.
I find the trick is to give simpler requests to the unmetered models, and save the harder requests for the premium models. You can select the model you want to use in the chat or agent box.
The model list is here : https://docs.cursor.com/settings/models
So, for example, I might give simpler requests that save time or involve boilerplate to Deepseek-v3, gemini-2.5-flash-preview, gpt-4o-mini, or grok3-mini-beta. These are unmetered, so you can use them as much as you like. For requests that are more difficult and require better thought, I would choose something like claude-3.7-sonnet, or gemini-2.5-pro.
For context, I prefer the workflow of using Ask (chat) mode and working on a single file at a time. If I want another file to be considered, I refer to it using the @ convention in Cursor to refer to other sources. Others have complained about Cursor skimping on the context window of requests to control costs, so I follow this approach to make sure that the things I specify are considered. The files referenced remain in the context of the chat, so they are included for followup requests.
I feel that for those of us with programming experience, using it in a discriminating way is the best approach. It might be disconcerting to see people rage about Cursor on Reddit, but there are a lot of Vibe coders on r/cursor with unrealistic expectations. So they might well only use Agentic mode with vague directions, then rage because they burned through all their credits in a weekend, or had the models erase code because they’re unaware of Version Control. Agentic mode can be useful, but I want to at least glance at every diff to make sure things are going in the right direction.
I would suggest the free trial to see if it improves your workflow as much as it did mine. BTW, I find that working in TypeScript is a sweet spot for this, as VSCode and derivatives excel at TS, and when diffs are suggested you get immediate feedback on whether it would break compilation before you’ve even accepted the suggestions.
Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?
#69I thought Cursor was pointless until trying out Google's latest coding GPT, which blows everything else out of the water. I may switch from VSCode to cursor for the next few months just because of that.
Why not just switch Copilot to use Google Gemini 2.5 Pro as the model?
With every update to the Copilot extension, I see less and less of a need to switch away from VS Code to some “dedicated AI editor du jour”.
Maybe I’m missing something, or maybe people aren’t keeping up with Copilot’s capabilities?
⁽¹⁾ https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/copilot/reference/copilot...
⁽²⁾ https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/copilot/chat/chat-agent-m...
⁽³⁾ https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/copilot/chat/copilot-edit...