3 ms·

Flip your thinking around for a second and consider why an IDE is required for an agent that codes for you? The IDE/editor is for me, the agent doesn't need it

Flip your thinking around for a second and consider why an IDE is required for an agent that codes for you? The IDE/editor is for me, the agent doesn't need it. That also means I am not forced to used whatever imperfect forked IDE the agent is implemented against.

worldsayshi 1y ago
> why an IDE is required for an agent that codes for you Because the agents aren't yet good enough for a hands off experience. You have to continuously monitor what it does if you want a passable code base.
- tsvetkov 1y ago
  Sure, but monitoring, reviewing and steering does not really require modern IDEs in their current form. Also, I'm sure agents can benefit from parts of IDE functionality (navigation, static analysis, integration with build tools, codebase indexing, ...), but they sure don't need the UI. And without UI those parts can become simpler, more composable and more portable (being compatible with multiple agent tools). IMO another way to think about CLI agentic coding tools as of new form of IDEs.
  - imp0cat 1y ago
    As was already mentioned elsewhere, Emacs + Magit to monitor incoming changes is a great combo.
  - apwell23 1y ago
    yes i am rejigging my whole vim setup Following are now stars of my workflow * Git plugins - Diffview, gitsigns, fugitive * Claude Code plugin / Terminals with claude code * Neovim sessions * Git worktrees Editing focused workflows have taken an backseat * LSP * Vim motion and editing efficiency * File navigation * Layouts
    - ricericerice 1y ago
      why even use vim at this point? the LLM ecosystem there is decent, but definitely less polished than using a modern IDE
      - worldsayshi 1y ago
        Vim motions are nice.
stavros 1y ago
I don't really need an IDE, but I do need a great code review interface.
- Xenoamorphous 1y ago
  As someone who hasn’t used Claude Code yet, can’t you configure it somehow to use a different tool of your liking, or it has to be in the cli?
  - stavros 1y ago
    I end up using the VCS tooling (lazygit for me), but coding agents really need to be integrated with this review environment. We need an extra step where the agent will group its changes into logical units (database models in one commit, types in another, business logic in another, tests in another), rather than having to review per-file. Programming has changed from writing code to reviewing/QAing and reprompting, but the tooling hasn't yet caught up with that workflow. We need Gerrit for coding agents, basically.
    - fooster 1y ago
      I just merge the change and review the diff. If it’s wrong I either revert or ask Claude to fix it.
- Touche 1y ago
  I use lazygit for that. But any diff tool you like will work.
dagss 1y ago
Whenever I have to take the wheel myself the AI tab completion makes it much smoother so I am kind of addicted to that. Semi-automatic mode. I would much rather use IntelliJ so perhaps my habits will change at some point, but right now I am stuck with Cursor/vscode for the tab completion.

worldsayshi 1y ago

> why an IDE is required for an agent that codes for you Because the agents aren't yet good enough for a hands off experience. You have to continuously monitor what it does if you want a passable code base.

tsvetkov 1y ago
Sure, but monitoring, reviewing and steering does not really require modern IDEs in their current form. Also, I'm sure agents can benefit from parts of IDE functionality (navigation, static analysis, integration with build tools, codebase indexing, ...), but they sure don't need the UI. And without UI those parts can become simpler, more composable and more portable (being compatible with multiple agent tools). IMO another way to think about CLI agentic coding tools as of new form of IDEs.
- imp0cat 1y ago
  As was already mentioned elsewhere, Emacs + Magit to monitor incoming changes is a great combo.
- apwell23 1y ago
  yes i am rejigging my whole vim setup Following are now stars of my workflow * Git plugins - Diffview, gitsigns, fugitive * Claude Code plugin / Terminals with claude code * Neovim sessions * Git worktrees Editing focused workflows have taken an backseat * LSP * Vim motion and editing efficiency * File navigation * Layouts
  - ricericerice 1y ago
    why even use vim at this point? the LLM ecosystem there is decent, but definitely less polished than using a modern IDE
    - worldsayshi 1y ago
      Vim motions are nice.

stavros 1y ago

I don't really need an IDE, but I do need a great code review interface.

Xenoamorphous 1y ago
As someone who hasn’t used Claude Code yet, can’t you configure it somehow to use a different tool of your liking, or it has to be in the cli?
- stavros 1y ago
  I end up using the VCS tooling (lazygit for me), but coding agents really need to be integrated with this review environment. We need an extra step where the agent will group its changes into logical units (database models in one commit, types in another, business logic in another, tests in another), rather than having to review per-file. Programming has changed from writing code to reviewing/QAing and reprompting, but the tooling hasn't yet caught up with that workflow. We need Gerrit for coding agents, basically.
  - fooster 1y ago
    I just merge the change and review the diff. If it’s wrong I either revert or ask Claude to fix it.
Touche 1y ago
I use lazygit for that. But any diff tool you like will work.

dagss 1y ago

Whenever I have to take the wheel myself the AI tab completion makes it much smoother so I am kind of addicted to that. Semi-automatic mode. I would much rather use IntelliJ so perhaps my habits will change at some point, but right now I am stuck with Cursor/vscode for the tab completion.