Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 140 posts

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#41

Post by jemmyw »

I've been using cline and RooCode with vscode. It's significantly better than copy pasting. I work in a quite large codebase that has several different areas, and these AI tools are really good when I get a task in an area I'm not very familiar with, they'll perform searches and write a plan telling me where to start. I feel like I would do a similar job, but it can do it faster and will always do a comprehensive search and double check, where I might get lazy and jump in the first place that looks right.

Much more hit and miss for actually writing code. Sometimes it works.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#42

Post by aussieguy1234 »

I do this to copy files into the chat

`cat file.js | xclip -sel clip`

On Linux, this copies the whole file to the clipboard and I can paste it in.

This is considerably faster than using the mouse.

I can also get a code review done by getting the diff `git diff develop..feature/my-branch | xclip -sel clip`

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#43

Post by oezi »

Flux159 wrote: post #5

I've gone through a few AI IDEs / agents and CLI tools now, currently on Cline with Gemini 2.5 Pro which is doing a pretty good job at my web app code with a decent .clinerules file in the repo. To answer why I don't use chat at all for coding anymore, some benefits of IDE / CLI agents: Copy pasting into chat apps don't allow for agentic runs (ie run bash commands, edit code, validate with linting / testing before ma…

> is effectively free right now using my own API key for Gemini.

I think the cost is/was a big factor preventing many from switching from Chat-based coding to Cline/Cursor/Aider.

For my hobby projects I don't want to spend 3 USD to get some assistance which I can get for free through a monthly subscription (and some extra pasting).

Google is smart to offer a free use tier on API-usage which seems enough for agentic coding.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#44

Post by tikotus »

I mainly use chat(GPT). I used copilot's free tier for a while. For making a quick low effort webpage with some nice styling it worked well. Probably better than chat, since it could touch all css, html and JS that are sprinkled around in different files. But that's not my main job. Overall, I think my work is mainly "deep" problem solving. I don't necessarily produce much code per day. The chat is a helpful aid for thinking, copilot not as much.

Another thing I've noticed is that writing the code myself has often a net longterm benefit. For a while I was generating all kinds of python scripts for converting data between formats etc. I'm not good with python, but LLMs are, so I just used that. Until I ran into a wall too many times. Eventually every "temporary script" kept growing until LLMs could no longer provide what I wanted, and then I was stuck. I would have to go through the whole code from start and internalize it fully to be able to get the thing done. I would have saved time doing it myself from the start. So now I mainly use the chat just to ask about available functions, syntax, etc, but rarely use the generated code. IDEs are not great for this kind of approach in my experience.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#45

Post by cwegener »

ValtteriL wrote: post #8

I 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…

I think the Coplit plugin is probably the closest thing to an AI IDE that actually works. As per my other comment, I don't actually use any IDE to begin with, but one of my coworkers who uses VSCode has been very fond of the latest iteration of the Copilot plugin.

From your description of how this plugin works, I see why it works so well. It is basically just focusing on the essentials (populating the appropriate context) and then does as best as it can to get out of the way ( <- this part is really important I think)

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#46

Post by oezi »

What is baffling to me is why Copilot's chat mode is still so bad. It allows you to use all the good models including Gemini Pro but still feels inferior to pasting to AI Studio.

Maybe the logic for gathering the context is wrong, the sampling parameters are tweaked or the tool context is messing things up.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#47

Post by kristopolous »

lilatree wrote: post #27

What about projects where secrecy matters? How do hedge funds use these? Are you comfortable feeding the secret sauce to Cursor?

self hosting via litellm or olama isn't as hard as you think. If you have company kind of money it shouldn't be a problem.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#48

Post by bad_username »

Try Roo code. It has the least "magic" compared to other solutions, down to having no subscription (you plug your own API key and go). It provides full control and visibity of what it does, you see the context window size and the cost of the conversation at all times. This product is the closest to being an honest "automation of what would be manual copying and pasting" and is a great way to explore the possibilities.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#49

Post by faustlast »

fhd2 wrote: post #40

I settled on gptel, which is an LLM package for Emacs. It's kind of a mix of both approaches: 1. You have chats right there in the editor, easy to copy/paste and manage context/history without switching to a browser. You can also quickly add files or portions of files to the context or remove them again. 2. You can choose which model you want to use for what, granted you have an API key. 3. You can quickly highlight…

have you tried aider? Using it with magit to see the changes is a good workflow. the aider integrations to emacs are also worth it, you can easily add/remove files and send highlighted parts of your buffer.

Re: Ask HN: How much better are AI IDEs vs. copy pasting into chat apps?

#50

Post by liampulles »

Usually 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 generic function or something. So stuff where it is more than just a find and replace. I've also used it a bit for programming languages I'm not familiar with, though I feel it hinders my learning of the language so I try to avoid that.

I use chat based stuff also to do these Input -> ? -> Output kind of things for data conversion or refactorings, I also use it a lot for generating more involved SQL (which I'm not very good at).

Post reply on HN