3 ms·
> So I have been using Cursor a lot more in a vibe code way lately and I have been coming across what a lot of people report: sometimes the model will rewrite p
by Wowfunhappy 2y ago
> So I have been using Cursor a lot more in a vibe code way lately and I have been coming across what a lot of people report: sometimes the model will rewrite perfectly working code that I didn't ask it to touch and break it.
I don't find this particularly problematic because I can quickly see the unnecessary changes in git and revert them.
Like, I guess it would be nice if I didn't have to do that, but compared to the value I'm getting it's not a big deal.
- zoogeny 2y agoI agree with this in the general sense but of course I would like to minimize the thrash. I have become obsessive about doing git commits in the way I used to obsess over Ctrl-S before the days of source control. As soon as I get to a point I am happy, I get the LLM to do a check-point check in so I can minimize the cost of doing a full directory revert. But from a time and cost perspective, I could be doing much better. I've internalized the idea that when the LLM goes off the rails it was my fault. I should have prompted it better. So I am now consider: how do I get better faster? And the answer is I do it as much as I can to learn. I don't just want to whine about the process. I want to use that frustration to help me improve, while avoiding going bankrupt.
- vessenes 2y agoi think this is particularly claude 3.7 behavior - at least in my experience, it's ... eager. overeager. smarter than 3."6" but still, it has little chill. gemini is better; o3 better yet. I'm mostly off claude as a daily driver coding assistant, but it had a really long run - longest so far.
- imafish 2y agoI get the same with gemini, though. o3 is kind of the opposite, under-eager. I cannot really decide on my favorite. So I switch back and forth :)