3 ms·

For me cursor provides a much tighter feedback loop than Claude code. I can review revert iterate change models to get what I need. It feels sometimes Claude co

For me cursor provides a much tighter feedback loop than Claude code. I can review revert iterate change models to get what I need. It feels sometimes Claude code is presented more as a yolo option where you put more trust on the agent about what it will produce. I think the ability to change models is critical. Some models are better at designing frontend than others. Some are better at different programming languages, writing copy, blogs, etc. I feel sabotaged if I can’t switch the models easily to try the same prompt and context across all the frontier options

cjonas 8mo ago
Same. For actual productions app I'm typically reviewing the thinking messages and code changes as they happen to ensure it stays on the rails. I heavily use the "revert" to previous state so I can update the prompt with more accurate info that might have come out of the agents trial and error. I find that if I don't do this, the agent makes a mess that often doesn't get cleaned up on its way to the actually solution. Maybe a similar workflow is possible with Claude Code...
- andai 8mo ago
  Yeah, autonomy has the cost of your mental model getting desynchronized. You either follow along interactively or spend time catching up later.
- FuckButtons 8mo ago
  You can ask Claude to work with you step by step and use /rewind. It only shows the diff though, which, hides some of the problem. Since diffs can seem fine in isolation, but when viewed in context can have obvious issues.
  - cjonas 8mo ago
    Ya I guess if you have the IDE open and monitor unstaged git, it's a similar workflow. The other cursor feature I use heavily is the ability to add specific lines and ranges of a file to the context. Feels like in the CLI this would just be pasted text and Claude would have to work a lot harder to resolve the source file and range

cjonas 8mo ago

Same. For actual productions app I'm typically reviewing the thinking messages and code changes as they happen to ensure it stays on the rails. I heavily use the "revert" to previous state so I can update the prompt with more accurate info that might have come out of the agents trial and error. I find that if I don't do this, the agent makes a mess that often doesn't get cleaned up on its way to the actually solution. Maybe a similar workflow is possible with Claude Code...

andai 8mo ago
Yeah, autonomy has the cost of your mental model getting desynchronized. You either follow along interactively or spend time catching up later.
FuckButtons 8mo ago
You can ask Claude to work with you step by step and use /rewind. It only shows the diff though, which, hides some of the problem. Since diffs can seem fine in isolation, but when viewed in context can have obvious issues.
- cjonas 8mo ago
  Ya I guess if you have the IDE open and monitor unstaged git, it's a similar workflow. The other cursor feature I use heavily is the ability to add specific lines and ranges of a file to the context. Feels like in the CLI this would just be pasted text and Claude would have to work a lot harder to resolve the source file and range