4 ms·

It seems the original poster hasn't extensively tried various AI coding assistants like Cursor or Windsurf. Just a quick heads-up based on my recent experience

It seems the original poster hasn't extensively tried various AI coding assistants like Cursor or Windsurf. Just a quick heads-up based on my recent experience with agent-based AI: while it's comfortable and efficient 90% of the time, the remaining 10% can lead to extremely painful debugging experiences. In my view, the optimal scenarios for using LLM coding assistants are: - Architectural discussions, effectively replacing traditional searches on Google. - Clearly defined, small tasks within a single file. The first scenario is highly strategic, the second is very tactical. Agents often fall awkwardly between these two extremes. Personally, I believe relying on an agent to manage multiple interconnected files is risky and counterproductive for development.

tomnipotent 2y ago
The author works on Cody at Sourcegraph so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he's tried all the major players in the game.
- mvdtnz 2y ago
  He's also author of one of the most legendary posts about programming language design of all time, Execution in the Kingdom of Nouns. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns.html?m=1 http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom...
hashmap 2y ago
This has been my experience as well. I find that the copy/paste workflow with a browser LLM still gets me the most bang for the buck in both those cases. The cli agents seem to be a bit manic when they get hold of the codebase and I have a harder time corralling them into not making large architectural changes without talking through them first. For the moment, after a few sessions of giving it a chance, I find myself using "claude commit" but not asking it to do much else outside the browser. I still find o1-pro to be the most powerful development partner. It is slow though.
sbszllr 2y ago
> In my view, the optimal scenarios for using LLM coding assistants are: > - Architectural discussions, effectively replacing traditional searches on Google. > - Clearly defined, small tasks within a single file. I think you're on point here, and it has been my experience too. Also, not limited to coding but general use of LLMs.
intrasight 2y ago
> extremely painful debugging experiences. I'd claim that if you're debugging the code - or even looking at it for that matter - that you're using AI tools the wrong way.
- chaosprint 2y ago
  I'd be very interested to know of a way to make it work with AI that doesn't require debugging if you can illustrate.
  - intrasight 2y ago
    Make what work with AI?
- collingreen 2y ago
  This is exactly my impression of the summary of these kinds of posts and, I'm speculating here, maybe where there is such a stark difference. I'm guessing that the folks who read the output and want to understand it deeply and want to "approve" it like a standard pull request are having a very different perspective and workflow than those who are just embracing the vibe. I do not know if one leads to better outcomes than the other.
  - esafak 2y ago
    Are you serious? Why not just vibe work with your human coworkers and merge to master then? Let's see what the outcome is!
    - collingreen 2y ago
      > Are you serious? I am serious and didn't think anything I said here was contentious. Which part are you feeling incredulity over? I'll try to clarify if I've been unclear or learn from your perspective.
      - esafak 2y ago
finolex1 2y ago
He literally says in his post "It might look antiquated but it makes Cursor, Windsurf, Augment and the rest of the lot (yeah, ours too, and Copilot, let's be honest) FEEL antiquated"
sitkack 2y ago
Steve Yegge, you should know who he is AND the post also mentioned Cursor and Windsurf. His own company works on a similar product.
bdangubic 2y ago
duuuuude :) you should seriously consider deleting this post… if you do not know who Steve Yegge is (the original poster as you call him) you really should delete this post
- turnsout 2y ago
  I appreciate that you're super attuned to this frothy space, but not everyone cares about learning all the many personalities in the ecosystem… even people who care about this stuff
  - mkozlows 2y ago
    The point is that he's not an AI guy, he's a long-time software dev guy going back decades.

tomnipotent 2y ago

The author works on Cody at Sourcegraph so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he's tried all the major players in the game.

mvdtnz 2y ago
He's also author of one of the most legendary posts about programming language design of all time, Execution in the Kingdom of Nouns. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns.html?m=1 http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom...

hashmap 2y ago

This has been my experience as well. I find that the copy/paste workflow with a browser LLM still gets me the most bang for the buck in both those cases. The cli agents seem to be a bit manic when they get hold of the codebase and I have a harder time corralling them into not making large architectural changes without talking through them first. For the moment, after a few sessions of giving it a chance, I find myself using "claude commit" but not asking it to do much else outside the browser. I still find o1-pro to be the most powerful development partner. It is slow though.

sbszllr 2y ago

> In my view, the optimal scenarios for using LLM coding assistants are: > - Architectural discussions, effectively replacing traditional searches on Google. > - Clearly defined, small tasks within a single file. I think you're on point here, and it has been my experience too. Also, not limited to coding but general use of LLMs.

intrasight 2y ago

> extremely painful debugging experiences. I'd claim that if you're debugging the code - or even looking at it for that matter - that you're using AI tools the wrong way.

chaosprint 2y ago
I'd be very interested to know of a way to make it work with AI that doesn't require debugging if you can illustrate.
- intrasight 2y ago
  Make what work with AI?
collingreen 2y ago
This is exactly my impression of the summary of these kinds of posts and, I'm speculating here, maybe where there is such a stark difference. I'm guessing that the folks who read the output and want to understand it deeply and want to "approve" it like a standard pull request are having a very different perspective and workflow than those who are just embracing the vibe. I do not know if one leads to better outcomes than the other.
- esafak 2y ago
  Are you serious? Why not just vibe work with your human coworkers and merge to master then? Let's see what the outcome is!
  - collingreen 2y ago
    > Are you serious? I am serious and didn't think anything I said here was contentious. Which part are you feeling incredulity over? I'll try to clarify if I've been unclear or learn from your perspective.
    - esafak 2y ago

finolex1 2y ago

He literally says in his post "It might look antiquated but it makes Cursor, Windsurf, Augment and the rest of the lot (yeah, ours too, and Copilot, let's be honest) FEEL antiquated"

sitkack 2y ago

Steve Yegge, you should know who he is AND the post also mentioned Cursor and Windsurf. His own company works on a similar product.

bdangubic 2y ago

duuuuude :) you should seriously consider deleting this post… if you do not know who Steve Yegge is (the original poster as you call him) you really should delete this post

turnsout 2y ago
I appreciate that you're super attuned to this frothy space, but not everyone cares about learning all the many personalities in the ecosystem… even people who care about this stuff
- mkozlows 2y ago
  The point is that he's not an AI guy, he's a long-time software dev guy going back decades.