Vibe Coding: Developer Slot Machines (Cursor, Windsurf)

[bilekas]

This article is really difficult to read or its just me? The breaks with the adds are really distracting and I don't know what the author actually is saying here, that he will try windsurf? Do I need to watch the video?

[stavros]

I had the same thought, basically here's a summary, as far as I can tell:

> AIs are sometimes good for code, sometimes not so good. I put some money in but don't know what code will come out, and it's so easy to put more money in. My friend told me to use Windsurf instead of Cursor, and it's easy to switch IDEs, they have no moat. Where's the moat?

AFAICT, that's the whole article.

[graylien]

Hey, to clarify it's about the user experience of IDEs - how it feels to jump from one to the other, how the UI prompts you to add more credits (so you can end up spending a lot if you're not careful with prompts).

This has often drawn similarities to a slot machine, the way it is not deterministic what code will come out, and what changes to which files will be made.

[ratatoskrt]

Not just you. Why is on the front page?

[softwaredoug]

Maybe I'm a luddite, but I like having ChatGPT generate my code the old fashioned way...

[hu3]

This is a way to bypass alleged hidden prompt trimming by IDEs.

Some people say AI IDEs might summarize or even trim prompt to reduce token input.

[graylien]

funny how ChatGPT is already old fashioned

[rgoulter]

Since LLMs are sometimes wonderfully useful, and sometimes not, I'd suggest effective use involves figuring out in which cases it's likely to succeed, which it's likely to fail.

For example, the mentioned graph has "initial prompt with iterative tweaks", followed by iterations of 'starting from scratch'. -- I don't understand why you'd think "this is an ineffective way of doing things", and then keep doing it.

Describing LLMs as "slot machines" seems like the author has no curiosity about the shape of what LLMs can/can't do.

[okamiueru]

Answer is useful as a suggestion, and doesn't need to be factually correct: Good

Answer is useful as is, and needS to be factually correct: Bad

[nonethewiser]

I do think its a bit slot machine like because the output isnt deterministic.

[Arn_Thor]

I was coding with VSCode for a while and just this week decided to try Cursor which everyone have been raving about. Was quite disappointed to find no meaningful difference with VSCode (so far, after 30 minutes of working with it).

[jmisavage]

It's a fork of VS Code that still uses the official extensions, despite that violating the license terms. Functionally, it's pretty similar to using VS Code with Copilot, but with the added bonus of choosing from multiple models. I’ve only just started using it at work, so my experience is also pretty limited, but so far the results seem slightly better.

[graylien]

Were you using Copilot? I haven't tried VS Code for a while, I guess I can have that one open too. You can even have Windsurf inside VS Code with the plugin I think..

Maybe Cursor/Windsurf could've just been plugins? Only Zed.ai seems really different of the popular IDEs

[hu3]

Speaking about agentic coding I have a question about Copilot in VSCode.

In agent mode (need to enable it manually in settings), did anyone test forcing Copilot to run unit tests after code changes and fix code to pass tests if they break?

[_joel]

That's what I do as standard in Windsurf. I set memories for it to run the tests too. That's standard, right?

[zerosleep]

I find VS Code + Cline extension and it's memory-bank pattern far easier to control while still feeling like I'm "vibing". Anyone else use that setup or is it already antiquated?