6 ms·

There are two key points which are important to get most out of LLM coding assistants: 1. Use a high quality model with big context windows via API (I recommen

There are two key points which are important to get most out of LLM coding assistants: 1. Use a high quality model with big context windows via API (I recommend Openrouter). E.g. Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is one of the best which keeps constant good quality (OpenAI reasoning models can be better in problem solving but it's kinda a mixed bag). Other people swear by the Claude Sonnet models. 2. Upgrade your code tools you combine with this high quality models. Google Jules and OpenAI Codex are so brand new and have a totally different aim than Cursor. Don't use them (yet). Maybe they will get good enough in future. I would focus on established tools like aider (steepest learning curve), roo code (easier) to be paired with Openrouter and if you want to have it really easy claude code (only useful with a 100-200 USD Anthropic subscription IMHO). On average you will get better results with Aider, roo, claude code than with Cursor or Windsurf. Btw. I think Cursor and Windsurf are great as a starter because you buy a subscription with 15-20 USD and are set. It can be most likely that the more high quality tools burn more tokens and you spent more per month but you also get better quality back in return. Last but not least and can be applied to every coding assistant: Improve your coding prompts (be more specific in regards to files or sources), do smaller and more iterations until reaching your final result.

prmph 1y ago
It's not about the tools. The complaint here is a general one that shows up no matter what tools you are using
- therealmarv 1y ago
  And I tell from personal experience: The tools matter (!) for more complex problems. Op said literally "Am I just not using the tools correctly?" and I said for the 2 of 3 tools OP tried are so new and experimental I would put them away (for now).
  - prmph 1y ago
    You're still perpetuating this myth that it is about the tools, when every interaction I've had with coding assistants and LLMs veers into the territory OP describes. To be fair, the work I am doing is pretty complex and novel. And I use a wide range of model/versions.I mostly use Claude, from 3.5 to the newest 4.0. I also use Gemini and with Copilot.
    - therealmarv 1y ago
      It's not a myth. I don't promise that better tools solve every problem but it can increase quality and usefulness of the output. One of the main big problems of (nearly) all AI coding tools is to get enough context of understanding which means the right files for a prompt need to be send along. Especially the bigger a project gets the more important that is. It's kinda an AI in itself just to gather the right files for the main AI prompt which is sent to the main solving AI. E.g. in aider I specify manually which files will be sent along the prompt and they are not truncated or ignored, something which can happen easily in tools like Copilot, Cursor, even in roo code behind the scenes. This leads to the result that the main AI does not see the whole picture of the project and makes wrong guesses and maybe assumptions. More details in prompts in every tool help find the AI to understand the bigger picture and the important files. It maybe even helps to describe and save the whole project and structure in a text file to describe it to the AI better along every prompt. Roo code is smarter with this problem, Claude Code is also pretty smart with it and in aider the problem does not exist if you as a human understand the project structure and tell aider the important context files to send to the AI.
    - kordlessagain 1y ago
      You are perpetuating that it isn't about the tools, but it definitely is about the tools it has to do things.
- infecto 1y ago
  The tools do matter. The original complaint is dribble. The poster does not even know what model they used in cursor which is surprising, it’s the most important part of the process. They also compared two entirely brand new tools that are not adjacent to cursor.
  - olddustytrail 1y ago
    > The original complaint is dribble. The usual word is "drivel" rather than "dribble".
    - infecto 1y ago
      Thanks was not paying attention with lack of sleep!
  - prmph 1y ago
    Ok, that's the "you're holding it wrong" thing. When I start to stray into even moderately complex work, LLMs become pretty useless quick. Tell me your setup, and I will give a quick sample task that it will fail at. Stop the fanboyism please
    - morsecodist 1y ago
      Thank you. It is so frustrating that you hear that LLMs are a PhD level intelligence capable of any task you can throw at it and when it can't solve your problem you hear: "well you are using a1.36 and b1.37-high is really the one this time" (despite the fact that you have been hearing these claims since before that model came out) or "you are prompting it wrong, have you tried describing all of your app features and your entire approach to coding in a text file then using that to get the AI to make a list of prompts then refining those prompts into different text files and put those back into the AI..."
      - qwerasdf5 1y ago
        Who told you that LLMs are a "PHD level intelligence"?

prmph 1y ago

It's not about the tools. The complaint here is a general one that shows up no matter what tools you are using

therealmarv 1y ago
And I tell from personal experience: The tools matter (!) for more complex problems. Op said literally "Am I just not using the tools correctly?" and I said for the 2 of 3 tools OP tried are so new and experimental I would put them away (for now).
- prmph 1y ago
  You're still perpetuating this myth that it is about the tools, when every interaction I've had with coding assistants and LLMs veers into the territory OP describes. To be fair, the work I am doing is pretty complex and novel. And I use a wide range of model/versions.I mostly use Claude, from 3.5 to the newest 4.0. I also use Gemini and with Copilot.
  - therealmarv 1y ago
    It's not a myth. I don't promise that better tools solve every problem but it can increase quality and usefulness of the output. One of the main big problems of (nearly) all AI coding tools is to get enough context of understanding which means the right files for a prompt need to be send along. Especially the bigger a project gets the more important that is. It's kinda an AI in itself just to gather the right files for the main AI prompt which is sent to the main solving AI. E.g. in aider I specify manually which files will be sent along the prompt and they are not truncated or ignored, something which can happen easily in tools like Copilot, Cursor, even in roo code behind the scenes. This leads to the result that the main AI does not see the whole picture of the project and makes wrong guesses and maybe assumptions. More details in prompts in every tool help find the AI to understand the bigger picture and the important files. It maybe even helps to describe and save the whole project and structure in a text file to describe it to the AI better along every prompt. Roo code is smarter with this problem, Claude Code is also pretty smart with it and in aider the problem does not exist if you as a human understand the project structure and tell aider the important context files to send to the AI.
  - kordlessagain 1y ago
    You are perpetuating that it isn't about the tools, but it definitely is about the tools it has to do things.
infecto 1y ago
The tools do matter. The original complaint is dribble. The poster does not even know what model they used in cursor which is surprising, it’s the most important part of the process. They also compared two entirely brand new tools that are not adjacent to cursor.
- olddustytrail 1y ago
  > The original complaint is dribble. The usual word is "drivel" rather than "dribble".
  - infecto 1y ago
    Thanks was not paying attention with lack of sleep!
- prmph 1y ago
  Ok, that's the "you're holding it wrong" thing. When I start to stray into even moderately complex work, LLMs become pretty useless quick. Tell me your setup, and I will give a quick sample task that it will fail at. Stop the fanboyism please
  - morsecodist 1y ago
    Thank you. It is so frustrating that you hear that LLMs are a PhD level intelligence capable of any task you can throw at it and when it can't solve your problem you hear: "well you are using a1.36 and b1.37-high is really the one this time" (despite the fact that you have been hearing these claims since before that model came out) or "you are prompting it wrong, have you tried describing all of your app features and your entire approach to coding in a text file then using that to get the AI to make a list of prompts then refining those prompts into different text files and put those back into the AI..."
    - qwerasdf5 1y ago
      Who told you that LLMs are a "PHD level intelligence"?