221–230 of 438 posts
This is a really underwhelming UI for something that is agent-first. It looks like they're mimicking Notion. The next generation of interfaces are not going to look like an evolution into minimalist text editor v250. This is like people iterating on terminals before building native or web applications.
TUIs blow most modern web apps out of the water in terms of UX
I've been running Claude Code in my Cursor IDE for a while now via extension. I like the setup, and I direct Claude on one task at a time, while still having full access to my code (and nice completions via Cursor). I still spend time tweaking, etc. before committing. I have zero interest in these new "swarms of agents" they are trying to force on us from every direction. I can barely keep straight my code working on…
> have zero interest in these new "swarms of agents" they are trying to force on us from every direction. Good for you! Personally waiting for one agent to do something while I shove my thumb up my butt just waiting around for it to generate code that I'll have to fix anyway is peak opposite of flow state, so I've eagerly adopted agents (how much free will I had in that decision is for philosophers to decide) so ther…
I’m guessing it was downvoted by the masses but at the same time I’d like the choice to be able to read it I’m not that into what the general public think about something.
I’m getting into downmaxxing at this point. I love that you have to earn being negative on this site. Give it to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Works until you discover subtle bugs hiding behind ugliness.
Yes, there are so many. As in hand-written code. I don’t take LLM written code for granted and I rewrite is sometimes. I know it’s not perfect. But it’s useful. Compile code is not perfect also. But who does hand-written assembler anymore? Yes, LLM is another layer, it would be ugly and slower but it’s much faster to use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you so much. These comments let me believe in my sanity in an over-hyped world. I see how people think its more productive, but honestly I iterate on my code like 10-15 times before it goes into production, to make sure it logs the right things, it communicates intent clearly, the types are shared and defined where they should be. It’s stored in the right folder and so on. Whilst the laziness to just pass it to…
So don't write slow flakey unit tests? Or better yet, have the AI make them not slow and not flakey? Of if you wanna be old school, figure out why they're flakey yourself and then fix it? If it's a time thing then fix that or if it's a database thing then mock the hell out of that and integration test, but at this point if your tests suck, you only have yourself to blame.
I’m saying I would guess I’m faster building manually then to let AI write it, arguably it won’t even achieve the level I feel best with in the future aka the one having the best business impact to my project.
Also the way I semantically define unit tests is that they are instant and non-flaky as they are deterministic else it would be a service for me.
The thing I've noticed is cursor was better at producing better results with a really shitty prompt.
That said, well written prompts on pi.dev seem to be out performing anything I ever tried on Cursor. That may just be me, but it's what I've noticed in my work.
This week I had 4 different agents, each with sub agents, all working on different tasks. Mostly greenfield work. My feedback was mostly nitpicky. I was pretty damn impressed
I find a lot of these IDEs are simply not as useful as a CLI. When I'm running a full agentic workflow, I don't really need to see the contents of the files at all time, I'd actually say I often don't need to at all, because I can't really understand 10k lines of code per hour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> have zero interest in these new "swarms of agents" they are trying to force on us from every direction. Good for you! Personally waiting for one agent to do something while I shove my thumb up my butt just waiting around for it to generate code that I'll have to fix anyway is peak opposite of flow state, so I've eagerly adopted agents (how much free will I had in that decision is for philosophers to decide) so ther…
I find it puzzling whenever someone claims to reach "flow" or "zen state" when using these tools. Reviewing and testing code, constantly switching contexts, juggling model contexts, coming up with prompt incantations to coax the model into the right direction, etc., is so mentally taxing and full of interruptions and micromanagement that it's practically impossible to achieve any sort of "flow" or "zen state". This i…
I have followed the usual autocomplete > VS Code sidebar copilot > Cursor > Claude Code > some orchestrator of multiple Codex/Claude Codes.
I haven’t experienced the flow state once in this new world of LLMs. To be honest it’s been so long that I can’t even remember what it felt like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anti-capitalist here: Our point is actually the same point as the one Anti-feudalists had. The consumer hostility observed under capitalism is simply a corollary.
To be fair feudalism (the row-farming kind) kind of collapsed because people found better deals with the rise of trade and mercantilism and such. It wasn’t anything anybody needed to make points over. IDEs seem headed in the same direction. Seriously, watching Codex rip apart binaries in parallel and Claude go from nothing to app in one prompt, I’m pretty sure there’s no need for me to look at any code. I’m fine usin…
I've been running Claude Code in my Cursor IDE for a while now via extension. I like the setup, and I direct Claude on one task at a time, while still having full access to my code (and nice completions via Cursor). I still spend time tweaking, etc. before committing. I have zero interest in these new "swarms of agents" they are trying to force on us from every direction. I can barely keep straight my code working on…
I think you misunderstand "swarms of agents", based on what you say above. An agent swarm, in my understanding and checked via a google search, does not imply working on multiple features at one time.
It is working on one feature with multiple agents taking different roles on that task. Like maybe a python expert, a code simplifier, a UI/UX expert, a QA tester, and a devils advocate working together to implement a feature.