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

Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

aavetis.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 124 posts

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#71

Post by wahnfrieden »

osigurdson wrote: post #15

I've been underwhelmed with dedicated tools like Windsurf and Cursor in the sense that they are usually more annoying than just using ChatGPT. They have their niche but they are just so incredibly flow destroying it is hard to use them for long periods of time. I just started using Codex casually a few days ago though and already have 3 PRs. While different tools for different purposes make sense, Codex's fully async…

On Mac I don’t like how chatgpt makes it difficult to have a few queries generating in parallel for my Xcode

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#73

Post by mmaunder »

wordofx wrote: post #63
mmaunder wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it can. Either using MCP or git via bash. It’s a glaring omission and calls the data into question. How is attribution done? If it’s via the agent taking credit in commit messages, that’s a problem because Claude code, for example, has a config parameter that lets you tell it to not credit itself. With Claude code completely missing I’d say this is wildly inaccurate.

The problem with Claude code is it doesn’t let you walk away. You have to press yes yes yes yes yes yes yes 500 times. Glad it’s missing until they fix this.

Actually you can enable everything, or have fine grained control over specifics. Or you just manually approve and ask not to be prompted again. Sounds like you're more of a dabbler.

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#74

Post by mmaunder »

cap11235 wrote: post #65
wordofx wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Claude code is it doesn’t let you walk away. You have to press yes yes yes yes yes yes yes 500 times. Glad it’s missing until they fix this.

Or you stick it in docker. Or actually configure your permissions. RTFM

Yeah sorry you got downvoted, but that's pretty much my inclination is to say RTFM. Honestly though, I'm very excited by how few developers are using the most powerful tools available. Huge opportunity for the rest of us willing to adapt to having our cheese moved, and willing to put in the work.

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#75

Post by nojs »

For people using these, is there an advantage to having the agent create PRs and reviewing these versus just iterating with Cursor/Claude Code locally before committing? It seems like additional bureaucracy and process when you could fix the errors sooner and closer to the source.

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#78

Post by cap11235 »

nojs wrote: post #75

For people using these, is there an advantage to having the agent create PRs and reviewing these versus just iterating with Cursor/Claude Code locally before committing? It seems like additional bureaucracy and process when you could fix the errors sooner and closer to the source.

Ignoring the issue of non-LLM team members, PR's are helpful if you are using GH issues as a memory mechanism, supposedly. That said, I don't bother if I don't have to. I have Claude commit automatically when it feels it made a change, then I curate things before I push (usually just squash).

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#79

Post by HenriNext »

ainiriand wrote: post #66
ubj wrote: post #50

Where is Claude Code? Surprised to see it completely left out of this analysis.

It is not an 'agent' in the sense that it is not really autonomous afaik.

Claude Code was not designed from the ground up to be only an autonomous agent, but it can certainly act as one.

- It has non-interactive CLI functionality (with -p "prompt" option) in addition to the default interactive TUI, making it easy to integrate to workflows.

- It has turn-key GitHub integration (https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code-action).

- It has internal task tracking system that uses ReadTodo/WriteTodo tools to write JSON task lists to `$HOME/.claude/tasks/`, and enabling it to stay on track better than most other tools.

- It has excellent and customisable context compaction.

- And it has flexible permission system that can be used to turn all permissions questions to auto-accept when running in sandboxed environments.

Together those features enable it to be just as autonomous as any GitHub AI bot action hype thing (even though that might not have been its original or primary use).

Re: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR Performance

#80

Post by IanCal »

polskibus wrote: post #57
lukehoban wrote: post #21

(Disclaimer: I work on coding agents at GitHub) This data is great, and it is exciting to see the rapid growth of autonomous coding agents across GitHub. One thing to keep in mind regarding merge rates is that each of these products creates the PR at a different phase of the work. So just tracking PR create to PR merge tells a different story for each product. In some cases, the work to iterate on the AI generated co…

What is your team’s take on the copyright for commits generated by ai agent ? Would the copyright protect it? Current US stance seems to be: https://www.copyright.gov/newsnet/2025/1060.html “It concludes that the outputs of generative AI can be protected by copyright only where a human author has determined sufficient expressive elements”. If entire commit is generated by AI then it is obvious what created it - it’s…

>If entire commit is generated by AI then it is obvious what created it - it’s AI.

Whether it's committed or not is irrelevant to the conclusion there, the question is what was the input.

Post reply on HN