Well, time to bite the bullet and learn jujutsu over the holidays
Obviously the working tree should be a commit like any other! It just makes sense!
81–90 of 264 posts
Well, time to bite the bullet and learn jujutsu over the holidays
Obviously the working tree should be a commit like any other! It just makes sense!
Imo Cursor did had the first mover advantage by making the first well known AI coding agent IDE. But I can't help but think they have no realistic path forward. As someone who is a huge IDE fan, I vastly prefer the experience from Codex CLI compared to having that built into my IDE, which I customize for my general purposes. The fact it's a fork of VSCode (or whatever) will make me never use it. I wonder if they bet…
Yeah, hard disagree on that one, based on recent surveys, 80-90% of developers globally use IDEs over CLIs for their day-to-day work. I was pretty worried about Cursor's business until they launched their Composer 1 model, which is fine-tuned to work amazingly well in their IDE. It's significantly faster than using any other model, and it's clearly fine-tuned for the type of work people use Cursor for. They are also…
I'm very pro IDE. I've built up an entire collection of VSCode extensions and workflows for programming, building, customizing build & debugging embedded systems within VSCode. But I still prefer CLI based AI (when talking about an agent to the IDE version).
> Composer 1
My bet is their model doesn't realistically compare to any of the frontier models. And even if it did, it would become outdated very quickly.
It seems somewhat clear (at least to me) that economics of scale heavily favor AI model development. Spend billions making massive models that are unusable due to cost and speed and distill their knowledge + fine tune them for stuff like tools. Generalists are better than specialists. You make one big model and produce 5 models that are SOTA in 5 different domains. Cursor can't do that realistically.
Imo Cursor did had the first mover advantage by making the first well known AI coding agent IDE. But I can't help but think they have no realistic path forward. As someone who is a huge IDE fan, I vastly prefer the experience from Codex CLI compared to having that built into my IDE, which I customize for my general purposes. The fact it's a fork of VSCode (or whatever) will make me never use it. I wonder if they bet…
I struggle with understand why engineers enjoy using these CLI coding tools so much. I have tried a few times and I simply cannot get into a good workflow. Cursor, Kline and others feel like the sweet spot for me.
A simple text interface, access to endless tools readily available with an (usually) intuitive syntax, man pages, ...
As a dev in front of it super easy to understand what it's trying to do, and as simple as it gets.
Never felt the same in Cursor, it's a lot of new abstractions that dont feel remotely as compounding
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, hard disagree on that one, based on recent surveys, 80-90% of developers globally use IDEs over CLIs for their day-to-day work. I was pretty worried about Cursor's business until they launched their Composer 1 model, which is fine-tuned to work amazingly well in their IDE. It's significantly faster than using any other model, and it's clearly fine-tuned for the type of work people use Cursor for. They are also…
Say more? It's the first time I see Composer 1 being talked about outside of the Cursor press stuff, with high praise no less. What are we talking about? Autocomplete or GPT/Claude contender or...? What makes it so great?
If these ai companies had 100x dev output, why would you acquire a company? Why not just show screenshots to your agent and get it to implement everything? Is it market share? Because I don't know who has a bigger user base that cursor.
What I do not understand is that if a high level staff with capacity can produce an 80% replacement why not assign the required staff to complete that last 10% to bring it to production readiness? That last 10% is unnecessary features and excess outside of the requirements.
Well, time to bite the bullet and learn jujutsu over the holidays
Well, Graphite solves the problem of how to keep your stack of GitHub pull requests in sync while you squash merge the lowest pull request in the stack; which as far as I know jujutsu does not help with.
If these ai companies had 100x dev output, why would you acquire a company? Why not just show screenshots to your agent and get it to implement everything? Is it market share? Because I don't know who has a bigger user base that cursor.
The claims are clearly exaggerated or as you say, we'd have AI companies pumping out new AI focused IDEs left and right, crazy features, yet they all are Vs code forks that roughly do the same shit A VSCode fork with AI, like 10 other competitors doing the same, including Microsoft and Copilot, MCPs, Vs code limitations, IDEs catching up. What do these AI VsCode forks have going for them? Why would I use one?
More specific models with faster tools is the better shovel. We are not there yet.
Imo Cursor did had the first mover advantage by making the first well known AI coding agent IDE. But I can't help but think they have no realistic path forward. As someone who is a huge IDE fan, I vastly prefer the experience from Codex CLI compared to having that built into my IDE, which I customize for my general purposes. The fact it's a fork of VSCode (or whatever) will make me never use it. I wonder if they bet…
I struggle with understand why engineers enjoy using these CLI coding tools so much. I have tried a few times and I simply cannot get into a good workflow. Cursor, Kline and others feel like the sweet spot for me.
Imo Cursor did had the first mover advantage by making the first well known AI coding agent IDE. But I can't help but think they have no realistic path forward. As someone who is a huge IDE fan, I vastly prefer the experience from Codex CLI compared to having that built into my IDE, which I customize for my general purposes. The fact it's a fork of VSCode (or whatever) will make me never use it. I wonder if they bet…
What I don't understand why people would go all in on one IDE/editor and refuse to make plugins for others. Whether you prefer the CLI or the integrated experience, only offering it on vscode (and a shitty version of it, as well) is just stupid.