[HN Gopher] Void: Open-source Cursor alternative
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Void: Open-source Cursor alternative
        
       https://voideditor.com/download-beta
        
       Author : sharjeelsayed
       Score  : 859 points
       Date   : 2025-05-08 16:35 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | xwowsersx wrote:
       | Can you use OpenRouter with this?
        
         | behnamoh wrote:
         | and pay 5% commission? no thanks.
        
           | kristopolous wrote:
           | There's also https://aihubmix.com/ that does it at cost
           | 
           | Also litellm
        
             | handfuloflight wrote:
             | Doesn't seem to be at cost, there's a markup on the input
             | and output tokens. At least for their Anthropic endpoints.
        
               | kristopolous wrote:
               | Google ones appear up be at cost. Maybe they do markup on
               | specific ones.
               | 
               | If you're all in on Claude then yeah, just go direct.
               | Going through a proxy of silly
        
               | handfuloflight wrote:
               | Well it's not silly if the proxy has higher rate limits.
        
           | NitpickLawyer wrote:
           | Early when sonnet 3.5 was the best coding model lots of
           | people used them because of the rate limits on anthropic's
           | own API. So that's a plus. There's also the ease of use, one
           | key for every model out there, and you get to choose
           | providers for things like deepseek / qwen / llama if those
           | suit your needs.
        
           | manmal wrote:
           | That doesn't sound bad, for extra redundancy?
        
         | tough wrote:
         | Yes at onboarding asks for gemini and openrouter keys
        
         | andrewpareles wrote:
         | Yes, you can bring OpenRouter or any other provider and connect
         | directly! (We don't route your messages through a backend like
         | others).
        
       | freeamz wrote:
       | Why no linux build? It is just vscode in ts right? And it is an
       | electron app right?
        
         | dcminter wrote:
         | Presumably you could raise a PR...?
         | 
         | https://github.com/voideditor/void#readme
        
         | ciwchris wrote:
         | There's a link for Linux at the bottom of the download page,
         | which directs to the releases in GitHub
        
         | mp5 wrote:
         | We do have a linux build! (the link is at the bottom of the
         | download page). Some systems are a bit finicky so we give more
         | options on setting it up.
        
           | skeledrew wrote:
           | I gave it a go. Was having issues installing the AppImage,
           | which is my preferred method, but extracting the .tar.gz (or
           | the .deb) eventually worked.
        
       | behnamoh wrote:
       | they always start as open source to bait users. how long until
       | this one also turns into BaitWare? I hope it won't since it's
       | backed by Y Combinator and has an Apache 2 license.
        
         | ramesh31 wrote:
         | >how long until this one also turns into BaitWare?
         | 
         | >VSCode Fork.
         | 
         | Already did. Can't wait to hear their super special very
         | important reason why this can't exist as an extension.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | " _Don 't be snarky._"
           | 
           | " _Please don 't post shallow dismissals, especially of other
           | people's work. A good critical comment teaches us
           | something._"
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | manmal wrote:
           | The best reason I've seen mentioned by the founder in this
           | thread, is showing/hiding panels, and the onboarding flow.
           | Those are things you can't do with a plugin. I personally
           | also like Cursor's diff view way better than Continue's, and
           | maybe that's because a fork gives more control there.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | (Edit: the parent comment was edited to add "I hope it won't
         | since it's backed by Y Combinator and has an Apache 2 license."
         | - that's a good redirection, and I probably wouldn't have
         | posted a mod reply if the comment had had that originally.)
         | 
         | (Btw if your comment already has replies, it is good to add
         | "Edit:" or something if you're changing it in a way that will
         | alter the context of replies.)
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | " _Please don 't post shallow dismissals, especially of other
         | people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something._"
         | 
         | " _Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of
         | what someone says, not a weaker one that 's easier to
         | criticize. Assume good faith._"
         | 
         | " _Don 't be curmudgeonly._"
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | rthnbgrredf wrote:
         | They first need to substantially grow the user base as we saw
         | with OpenWebUI, only then make an Enterprise offering and
         | switch the license from one day to another.
        
           | tough wrote:
           | Wait open web-ui has changed license?
        
             | debugnik wrote:
             | Yes, they've modified the licence to require preserving
             | their branding. I guess it's an anti-fork measure, you'd
             | have to infringe either on their licence or on their
             | trademark.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43901575
        
       | amackera wrote:
       | I've got a great setup going with Emacs and Aidermacs[1]. I just
       | can't stand using VS Code, it's impossible to configure to my
       | liking.
       | 
       | [1]: https://github.com/MatthewZMD/aidermacs
        
         | kurtis_reed wrote:
         | what sorts of things are hard to configure?
        
           | spauldo wrote:
           | Emacs' configurability is hard to describe to anyone who
           | hasn't immersed themselves in that sort of environment.
           | There's a small portion of the program written C, but the
           | bulk of it is written in elisp. When you evaluate elisp code,
           | you're not in some sandboxed extension system - you're at the
           | same level as Emacs itself. This allows you to modify nearly
           | any aspect of Emacs.
           | 
           | It'd be a security nightmare if it was more popular, but
           | fortunately the community hovers around being big enough for
           | serious work to be done but small enough that it's not worth
           | writing malware for.
        
             | skydhash wrote:
             | I don't think it's a security nightmare per-se. Most of the
             | time, you're not installing a lot of packages (the built-in
             | are extensive) and most of these are small and commonly
             | used.
             | 
             | It's like saying the AUR is a security nightmare. You're
             | just expected to be an adult and vet what you're using.
        
               | spauldo wrote:
               | I'm not sure I agree with the number and size of packages
               | people install (unless you're comparing them to, say,
               | org-mode), but that's not really what I'm talking about.
               | 
               | Emacs runs all elisp code as if it's part of Emacs. Think
               | about what Emacs is capable of, and compare that to what
               | a browser allows its extensions to do. No widely used
               | software works like that because it's way too easy to
               | abuse. Emacs gets away with it because it's not widely
               | used.
               | 
               | I don't know the first thing about VSCode but I'm willing
               | to bet there are strict limits to what its plugins are
               | allowed to do.
        
               | skydhash wrote:
               | I don't know if that's changed since last I wrote an
               | extension for a web browser, but the API is pretty open
               | for the current context (tab) that it's executing in. As
               | long as it's part of the API, the action is doable. Same
               | with VSCode or Sublime. Sandboxed plugins would be pretty
               | useless.
        
             | Buttons840 wrote:
             | I don't know if it's a security nightmare any more than
             | other editors that have "plugins" (or the like).
             | 
             | One advantage for Emacs is it's both easy and common read
             | the code of the plugins you are using. I can't tell you the
             | last time I looked at the source code of a plugin for VS
             | Code or any other editor. The last time I looked at the
             | code for a plugin in Emacs was today.
        
               | grg0 wrote:
               | That last line was totally unexpected, yet deeply
               | familiar. Took over a minute to recover from that rofl.
        
           | dotemacs wrote:
           | I guess it's hard to switch from a working setup that you've
           | invested time in.
           | 
           | Especially since you might not be familiar with the new one.
           | 
           | Personally, I'm trying out things in VS Code, just to see how
           | they work. But when I need to work, I do it in Emacs, since I
           | know it better.
           | 
           | Also, with VS Code, just while trying it out, simple things
           | like cut & paste would stop working (choosing them from the
           | menu, they would work, but trying to cut & paste with the key
           | shortcuts and the mouse, wouldn't). You'd have to refresh the
           | whole view or restart it, for cut & paste to become available
           | again.
        
         | koakuma-chan wrote:
         | My setup: vim -> ctrl + z -> claude -> ctrl + c -> fg
        
           | brcmthrowaway wrote:
           | good luck copy and pasting with vim with tmux in the mix
        
             | mm263 wrote:
             | Skill issue on your part
        
             | koakuma-chan wrote:
             | :w !clip.exe
        
             | dbalatero wrote:
             | it works?
        
           | calvinmorrison wrote:
           | it's a shame vim is so stinky because after 15 years of using
           | it now i find myself using vscode. I always like vim because
           | editing is efficient. Now I dont write as much as supervise a
           | lot of the boilerplate code.
           | 
           | Over the years I have gotten better with vim, added phpactor
           | and other tooling, but frankly i dont have time to futz and
           | its not so polished. With VSCode I can just work. I don't
           | love everything about it, but it works well enough with
           | copilot i forgot the benefits of vim.
        
             | skydhash wrote:
             | I get your experience, but for me using vim is perfect for
             | code exploration. The only needed plugins are fzf.vim and
             | vinegar. The first for fuzzy navigation and the second for
             | quickly browsing the current directory.
             | 
             | LSP experience with VSCode may be superior, but if I truly
             | needed that, I would get an IDE and have proper
             | intellisense. The LSP in Vim and Emacs is more than enough
             | for my basic requirements, which are auto-imports, basic
             | linting, and autocomplete to avoid misspellings. VSCode
             | lacks Vim's agility and Emacs's powerful text tooling, and
             | do far worse on integration.
        
       | jbellis wrote:
       | I created an OSS ai coding platform as well: https://brokk.ai
       | 
       | But it's a different take, Brokk is built to let humans supervise
       | AI more effectively rather than optimizing for humans reading and
       | writing code by hand. So it's not a VS Code fork, it's not really
       | an IDE in the traditional sense at all.
       | 
       | Intro video with demo here:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw92v-uN5xI
        
         | atak1 wrote:
         | Watched your Youtube. I love this - will try it out and give it
         | to our team. This is effectively the "full mode" version of the
         | mode I currently use Cursor for.
        
           | jbellis wrote:
           | Sweet! I'd love to hear how it goes, hmu on
           | https://discord.gg/QjhQDK8kAj
        
         | 999900000999 wrote:
         | Can it run in a GitHub action ?
         | 
         | What I want is to be able to do is.
         | 
         | 1. Create a branch called TaskForLLM_123 2. Add a file with
         | text instructions called Instructions_TaskForLLM_123.txt 3.
         | Have a GitHub action read the branch, perform the task and then
         | submit a PR.
        
           | manmal wrote:
           | I've seen people do this with Claude Code to great success
           | (not in a GH Action). Even multiple sessions concurrently.
           | Token budget is the limit, obviously.
        
           | jbellis wrote:
           | worktree + pr support is coming soon, in the meantime you
           | gotta do it manually
        
       | nm980 wrote:
       | Is there some benefit from forking vscode instead of creating an
       | extension?
        
         | gman83 wrote:
         | People keep saying that the extensions API is too limited or
         | something, but Cline seems to manage fine with being an
         | extension.
        
           | kristopolous wrote:
           | They've been changing that recently
        
           | rzzzt wrote:
           | Eclipse Theia can host VSCode extensions, but it also has its
           | own extension mechanism that offers more customization, it
           | could be a viable alternative: https://theia-
           | ide.org/docs/extensions/
        
           | mp5 wrote:
           | You're right that extensions do manage fine - the main
           | differences right now are UX improvements (many of them are
           | mentioned above). I can see the differences compounding at
           | some point which is why we're focused on the full IDE side.
        
         | MortyWaves wrote:
         | It gets them more slop funding if they can say they have an "AI
         | IDE".
        
           | mentalgear wrote:
           | well you got downvoted, but it's not wrong: funding
           | attractiveness of an extension (Cline) vs your "own IDE".
        
             | MortyWaves wrote:
             | Of course I got downvoted (but it's gone back to four now)
             | because this is HN, where somehow a group of otherwise
             | seemingly intelligent people are all patting themselves on
             | the back about the latest Y Combinator AI slop funding.
        
         | johnfn wrote:
         | As an (ex) VSCode extension developer, VSCode really does lock
         | down what you can do as an extension. It's well intentioned and
         | likely led to the success of VSCode, but it's not great if you
         | want to build entirely new UI interactions. For instance,
         | something like the cmd-k inline generation UI in Cursor is
         | basically impossible as a VSCode extension.
        
           | stevage wrote:
           | Maybe someone should just fork VS Code in a more liberal way,
           | then everyone can build their extensions on top of that.
        
             | johnfn wrote:
             | The restrictive extension ecosystem was a big part of
             | VSCode's success. You can compare to Atom, which allowed
             | extensions to do whatever they wanted: Atom ended up
             | feeling exceptionally slow and bloated because extensions
             | had full latitude to grind your IDE to a halt.
        
               | stevage wrote:
               | Yeah, I don't have a problem with that!
               | 
               | But since there seems to be a need for AI-powered forks
               | of VS Code, it could make sense for them all to build off
               | the same fork, rather than making their own.
        
               | johnfn wrote:
               | Isn't that what they're doing by building off of vscode?
        
               | mp5 wrote:
               | Yup, just rebased about a week ago
        
             | sureIy wrote:
             | Ask Firefox how that went.
             | 
             | Hint: they dropped XUL because every update broke
             | extensions
        
               | stevage wrote:
               | That's not comparable though, right? I'm suggesting a
               | third party forks the main product.
        
               | sureIy wrote:
               | Worse. The result is the same: an unmaintainable product,
               | and now you also become increasingly incompatible with
               | the source.
        
         | zamalek wrote:
         | One of the big _disadvantages_ is that it prevents access to
         | the VSCode-licensed plugins, such as the good C# LSP (seems EEE
         | isn't completely dead). That's something to pay attention to if
         | you're considering a fork and use an affected language.
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | Since these products supposedly make developers 1000x more
           | productive it should be no problem to just re-implement those
           | proprietary MS plugins from scratch. Right? Any
           | volunteers...?
        
             | manmal wrote:
             | MS will be tuning Copilot to the point it's the best agent
             | for C#, for sure. It might take a little longer ofc. But
             | Nadella mentioned to Zuck in a fireside chat that they are
             | not happy with C# support in LLMs and that they are working
             | on this.
        
           | neonsunset wrote:
           | C# language server, being Roslyn Language Server, is plugin
           | agnostic, it's MIT licensed and is essentially a part of the
           | compiler: https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/tree/main/src/Lang
           | uageServe....
           | 
           | Did you mean to say a debugger? That one has an open
           | alternative (NetCoreDbg) alongside a C# extension fork which
           | uses it (it's also what VS Codium would install). It's also
           | what you'd use via DAP with Neovim, Emacs, etc.
        
             | zamalek wrote:
             | Nope, OmniSharp - which uses that AFAIK, is what I'm
             | referring to. Something being open source doesn't
             | automatically make it good.
        
               | neonsunset wrote:
               | Omnisharp is what the base C# extension used previously.
               | It has been replaced by Roslyn LS (although can be
               | switched to back still). You are talking about something
               | you have no up-to-date knowledge of.
        
         | andrewpareles wrote:
         | Void dev here! As others have mentioned, VSCode strongly limits
         | the functionality that you can build as an extension. A few
         | things we've built that aren't supported as an extension: - the
         | Accept|Reject UI and UX - Cmd+K - Control over the terminal and
         | tabs - Custom autocomplete - Smaller things like ability to
         | open/close the sidebar, onboarding, etc
         | 
         | It's been a lot harder to build an IDE than an extension, but
         | we think having full control over the IDE (whether that's
         | VSCode or something else we build in the future) will be
         | important in the long run, especially when the next iteration
         | of tool-use LLMs comes out (having native control over Git, the
         | UI/UX around switching between iterations, etc).
        
           | mentalgear wrote:
           | the Accept|Reject UI and UX , Continue as a VS Code extension
           | also seems to manage this
        
           | stevage wrote:
           | >Smaller things like ability to open/close the sidebar
           | 
           | Are you sure about this one? I'm sure I have used an
           | extension whose whole purpose was to automatically open or
           | close the sidebar under certain conditions.
        
         | danenania wrote:
         | I wish all these companies the best and I understand why
         | they're forking, but personally I really don't want my main IDE
         | maintained by a startup, especially as a fork. I use Cursor,
         | and I've run into a number of bugs at the IDE level that have
         | nothing to do with the AI features. I imagine this is only
         | going to get worse over time.
        
       | elric wrote:
       | Any particular reason why they forked VSCode and not Theia?
        
         | kookamamie wrote:
         | Nobody uses Theia, relatively speaking.
        
           | elric wrote:
           | This sounds like exactly the kind of thing Theia would be
           | useful for. It's easier than a straight up fork of VSCode.
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Would you please stop posting like this?
         | 
         | We're trying for thoughtful, respectful discussion of people's
         | work on this site. Snarky, nasty oneliners destroy that.
         | 
         | We detached this subthread from
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43928512.
        
           | ramesh31 wrote:
           | Apologies for the snark, you're correct.
           | 
           | But I do stand by the point. We are seeing umpteen of these
           | things launched every week now, all with the exact same goal
           | in mind; monetizing a thin layer of abstraction between code
           | repos and model providers, to lock enterprises in and sell
           | out as quickly as possible. None of them are proposing
           | anything new or unique above the half dozen open source
           | extensions out there that have gained real community support
           | and are pushing the capabilities forward. Anyone who actually
           | uses agentic coding tools professionally knows that Windsurf
           | is a joke compared to Cline, and that there is no good reason
           | whatsoever for them to have forked. This just poisons the
           | well further for folks who haven't used one yet.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Yes, the high-order bit is to avoid snark, so thanks about
             | that. And it's clear that you know about this space and
             | have good information and thoughts to contribute--great!
             | 
             | I would still push back on this:
             | 
             | > all with the exact same goal in mind
             | 
             | It seems to me that you're assuming too much about other
             | people's intentions, jumping beyond what you can possibly
             | know. When people do that to reduce things to a cynical
             | endstate before they've gotten off the ground, that's not
             | good for discussion or community. This is part of the
             | reason why we have guidelines like these in
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:
             | 
             | " _Please don 't post shallow dismissals, especially of
             | other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us
             | something._"
             | 
             | " _Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation
             | of what someone says, not a weaker one that 's easier to
             | criticize. Assume good faith._"
             | 
             | " _Don 't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine,
             | but please don't be rigidly or generically negative._"
        
               | ramesh31 wrote:
               | I'll take my paddling. Thanks for the work you do here
               | btw, truthfully.
        
       | tough wrote:
       | Oh wow this is nice, will try it out.
       | 
       | Ycombinator backed too I guess Vibe coding is here to stay
        
         | throwaway314155 wrote:
         | > Ycombinator backed too
         | 
         | Oh wow, I didn't even realize. Substantially less appealing of
         | a project to me now.
        
           | tough wrote:
           | I just gave zed a try after trying it a few months ago and
           | it's come along way, not a bad non-cursor chat AI IDE. Its
           | tracking mode is pretty cool
        
       | sampton wrote:
       | VSCode death by a thousand forks.
        
       | olalonde wrote:
       | It feels like everyone and their mother is building coding agents
       | these days. Curious how this compares to others like Cline, VS
       | Code Copilot's Agent mode, Roo Code, Kilo Code, Zed, etc. Not to
       | mention those that are closed source, CLI based, etc. Any
       | standout features?
        
         | jadbox wrote:
         | My 2c: I rarely need agent mode. As an older engineer, I
         | usually know what exactly needs to be done and have no problem
         | describing to the LLM what to do to solve what I'm aiming to
         | do. Agent mode seems its more for novice developers who are
         | unsure what tasks need to be broken down and the strategy that
         | they are then solved.
        
           | ivape wrote:
           | "Novice mode" has always been true for the newcomer. When I
           | was new, I really was at the mercy of:
           | 
           | 1) Authority (whatever a prominent evangelist developer was
           | peddling)
           | 
           | 2) The book I was following as a guide
           | 
           | 3) The tutorial I was following as a guide
           | 
           | 4) The consensus of the crowd at the time
           | 
           | 5) Whatever worked (SO, brute force, whatever library,
           | whatever magic)
           | 
           | It took a long ass time before I got to throw all five of
           | those things out ( _throw the map away_ ). At the moment, #5
           | on that list is AI (whatever works). It's a Rite of Passage,
           | and because so much of being a developer involves
           | autodidacticism, this is a valley you must go through. Even
           | so, it's pretty cool when you make it out of that valley (you
           | can do whatever you want without any anxiety about _is this
           | the right path?_ ). You are never fearful or lost in the
           | valley(s) for the most part afterward.
        
             | boredtofears wrote:
             | If you use AI agents for all your work as a novice do you
             | ever make it out of the valley?
        
               | ivape wrote:
               | Yeah.
               | 
               | Most people have not deployed enough critical code that
               | was mostly written with AI. It's when that stuff breaks,
               | and they have to debug it with AI, that's when they'll
               | have to contend with the blood, sweat, and tears. That's
               | when the person will swear that they'll never use AI
               | again. The thing is, we can never _not_ use AI ever
               | again. So, this is the trial by fire where many will
               | figure out the _depth_ of the valley and emerge from it
               | with all the lessons. I can only speculate, but I suspect
               | the lessons will be something along the lines of  "some
               | things should use less AI than others".
               | 
               | I think it's a cool journey, best of luck to the AI-first
               | crowd, you will learn lessons the rest of us are not
               | brave enough to embark on. I already have a basket of
               | lessons, so I travel differently through the valley
               | (hint: My ship still has a helm).
        
               | juliushuijnk wrote:
               | > that's when they'll have to contend with the blood,
               | sweat, and tears.
               | 
               | Or, most software will become immutable. You'll just
               | replace it.
               | 
               | You'll throw away the mess, and let a newer LLM build a
               | better version in a couple of days. You ask the LLM to
               | write down the specs for the newer version based on the
               | old code.
               | 
               | If that is true, then the crowd that is not brave enough
               | to do AI-first will just be left behind.
        
               | ivape wrote:
               | _If that is true, then the crowd that is not brave enough
               | to do AI-first will just be left behind._
               | 
               | Not even, _devoured_ might be more apt. If I 'm manually
               | moving through this valley and a flood is coming through,
               | those who are sticking automatic propellers and
               | navigation systems on their ship are going to be the ones
               | that can surf the flood and come out of the valley. We
               | don't know, this is literally the adventure. I'm
               | personally on the side of a hybrid approach. It's fun as
               | hell, best of luck to everyone.
               | 
               | It's in poor taste to bring up this example, but I'll
               | mention it as softly as I can. There were some people
               | that went down looking for the Titanic recently. It could
               | have worked, you know what I mean? These are risks we all
               | take.
               | 
               | Quoting the Admiral from Starcraft Broodwars cinematic
               | (I'm a learned person):
               | 
               |  _"... You must go into this with both eyes open "_
        
               | dbalatero wrote:
               | > It's in poor taste to bring up this example, but I'll
               | mention it as softly as I can. There were some people
               | that went down looking for the Titanic recently. It could
               | have worked, you know what I mean?
               | 
               | Not sure if you drew the right conclusion from that one.
        
               | aerhardt wrote:
               | The scenario you paint sounds very implausible for non-
               | trivial applications, but even if it ends up becoming the
               | development paradigm, I doubt anyone will be "left
               | behind" as such. People will have time to re-skill. The
               | question is whether some will ever want to or would
               | prefer to take up woodworking.
        
               | skeledrew wrote:
               | Whether one takes up woodworking or not depends on
               | whether or not development was primarily for profit, with
               | little to not intrinsic enjoyment of the role.
        
               | weq wrote:
               | Coding and woodworking are similiar from my perspective,
               | they are both creative arts. I like coding in different
               | lanuages, woodworking is simply a physical manifestion of
               | such. In a world where you only need agents, is not a
               | world where nerds will be employed. Traditional nerds
               | cant stand out from the crowd anymore.
               | 
               | This is peak AI, it only goes downhill from here in terms
               | of quality, the AI first flows will be replaceable. Those
               | offshored teams that we have suffered with for years now
               | will be primarly replaced (google first programmers). And
               | developers will continue, working around the edges. The
               | differences will be that startups wont be able to use
               | technology horading to stifle competition, unless they
               | make themselves immune from the ai vacumes.
               | 
               | I can appreciate the comments further up around how AI
               | can help unravel the mysterys of a legacy codebase. Being
               | able to ask questions about code in quick succession will
               | mean that we will feel more confident. AI is lossy, hard
               | to direct, yet very confident always. We have 10k line
               | functions in our legacy code that nests and nest. How
               | confident are you to let ai go and refactor this code
               | without oversight and ship to a customer? Thus far im
               | not, maybe i dont know the best model and tools to use
               | and how to apply them, but even if one of those logic
               | branches gets hallucinated im in for a very bumpy ride.
               | Watching non-technical people at my org get frusted and
               | stuck with it in a loop is a lot more common then the
               | successes which seem to be the opposite of the
               | experienced engineers who use it as a tool, not a savour.
               | But every situation is different.
               | 
               | If you think you company can be a differentiator in the
               | market because it has access to the same AI tool as every
               | other company? We'll well see about that. I believe there
               | has to be more.
               | 
               | Im an experienced engineer of 30+yrs. Technology comes
               | and goes. AI is just a another tool in the chest. I use
               | it primarily because i dont have to deal with ads. I also
               | use it to be a electrical engineer, designing circuts in
               | areas i am not familiar with. I can see very simply the
               | noivce side of the coin, it feels like you have super
               | powers because you just dont know enough about the
               | subject to be aware of anything else. Its sped up the
               | learning cycle considerably beacause of the
               | conversational nature. After a few years of projects, i
               | know how to ask better questions to get better results.
        
               | JoshuaDavid wrote:
               | > Or, most software will become immutable. You'll just
               | replace it.
               | 
               | The joys of dependency hell combined with rapid
               | deprecation of the underlying tooling.
        
               | spookie wrote:
               | Slaves to the system.
               | 
               | Do we really want that? To be beholden to the hands of a
               | few?
               | 
               | Hell, you can't even purchase a GPU with high enough VRAM
               | these days for an acceptable amount of money. In part
               | because of geopolitics. I wonder how many
               | morerestrictions are there to come.
               | 
               | There's a lot of FOMO going around, those honing their
               | programming skills will continue to thrive, and that's a
               | guarantee. Don't become a vassal when you can be a king.
        
           | dakiol wrote:
           | Same here. It's fine for me to use the ChatGPT web interface
           | and switch between it and my IDE/editor.
           | 
           | Context switching is not the bottleneck. I actually like to
           | go away from the IDE/keyboard to think through problems in a
           | different environment (so a voice version of chatgpt that I
           | can talk to via my smartwatch while walking and see some
           | answers either on my smartglasses or via sound would be
           | ideal... I don't really need more screen (monitor) time)
        
             | DoesntMatter22 wrote:
             | Man that workflow is brutal
        
             | divan wrote:
             | I use voice mode of ChatGPT almost exclusively using RayBan
             | metaglasses(especially when outside / cyciling).
        
             | jjani wrote:
             | You _would_ like to, or you 're actually doing that right
             | now?
        
             | johnisgood wrote:
             | > Same here. It's fine for me to use the ChatGPT web
             | interface and switch between it and my IDE/editor.
             | 
             | I do this all the time, and I am completely fine with it.
             | Sure, I need to pay more attention, but I think it does
             | more good than harm.
        
             | CuriouslyC wrote:
             | Sorry to say but this workflow just isn't great unless
             | you're working on something where AI models aren't that
             | helpful -- obscure language/libraries/etc where they
             | hallucinate or write non-idiomatic solutions if left to run
             | much by themselves. In that case, you want the strong human
             | review loop that comes from crafting the context via copy
             | paste and inspecting the results before copying back.
             | 
             | For well trodden paths that AI is good at, you're wasting a
             | ton of time copying context and lint/typechecking/test
             | results and copying back edits. You could probably double
             | your productivity by having an agentic coding workflow in
             | the background doing stuff that's easy while you manually
             | focus on harder problems, or just managing two agents that
             | are working on easy code.
        
           | fellowmartian wrote:
           | I'm a senior engineer and I find myself using agents all the
           | time. Working on huge codebases or experimenting with
           | different languages and technologies makes everybody
           | "novice".
        
             | azinman2 wrote:
             | Can you give some examples of how you use it? I'm used to
             | asking for very specific things, but less so full on agent
             | mode.
        
               | hadlock wrote:
               | Agent mode seems to be better at realizing all the places
               | in the code base that need to be updated, particularly if
               | the feature touches 5+ files, whereas editor starts to
               | struggle with features that touch 2-3 files. "every 60
               | ticks, predict which items should get cached based on
               | user direction of travel, then fetch, transform and cache
               | them. when new items need to be drawn, check the cache
               | first and draw from there, otherwise fetch and transform
               | on demand." this touches the core engine, user movement,
               | file operations, graphics etc and agent mode seems to
               | have no problem with this at all.
        
               | maronato wrote:
               | Personally, I've found agents to be a great
               | "multitasking" tool.
               | 
               | Let's say I make a few changes in the code that will
               | require changes or additions to tests. I give the agent
               | the test command I want it to run and the files to read,
               | and let it cycle between running tests and modifying
               | files.
               | 
               | While it's doing that, I open Slack or do whatever else I
               | need to do.
               | 
               | After a few minutes, I come back, review the agent's
               | changes, fix anything that needs to be fixed or give it
               | further instructions, and move to the next thing.
        
               | andrewpareles wrote:
               | I think a good use of time while waiting for an LLM is to
               | ask another LLM for something. Until then Slack will do
               | :)
        
           | SkyBelow wrote:
           | One benefit is when working on multiple code bases where the
           | size of the code base is larger than the time spent working
           | on it, so there is still a gap of knowledge. Agents don't
           | guarantee the correctness of a search the same an old search
           | field does, but it offers a much more expressive way to do
           | searches and queries in a code base.
           | 
           | Now that I think about it, I might have only ever used agents
           | for searching and answering questions, not for producing
           | code. Perhaps I don't trust the AI to build a good enough
           | structure, so while I'll use AI, it is one file at a time
           | sort of interaction where I see every change it makes. I
           | should probably try out one of these agent based models for a
           | throw away project just to get more anecdotes to base my
           | opinion on.
        
           | volkk wrote:
           | kind of ironic, because the novices are the ones that
           | absolutely should be doing things by hand to get better at
           | the craft.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | The day will come when only a few need to be "better at the
             | craft". Just as with Assembly and even C.
        
               | spookie wrote:
               | C is still in the top 5 most used languages by any
               | metric.
        
               | volkk wrote:
               | no one writes assembly, but good engineers still
               | understand how things work under the hood
        
           | victorbjorklund wrote:
           | I dont agree. I use agents all the time. I say exactly what
           | the agent should do but often changes need to be made in more
           | than one place in the code base. Could I prompt it for every
           | change one at a time per file? Sure, but it is faster do
           | prompt an agent for it.
        
           | rcarmo wrote:
           | Considering that Agent Mode saves me a lot of hassle doing
           | refactoring ("move the handler to file X and review imports",
           | "check where this constant is used and replace it with
           | <another> for <these cases>", etc.), I'd say you are missing
           | the point...
           | 
           | I actually flip things - I do the breakdown myself in a
           | SPEC.md file and then have the agent work through it.
           | Markdown checklists work great, and the agent can usually
           | update/expand them as it goes.
        
           | SkyPuncher wrote:
           | I couldn't use AI code without agentic mode.
           | 
           | At it's most basic, agentic mode is necessary for building
           | the proper context. While I might know the solution at the
           | high level, I need the agent to explore the code base to find
           | things I reference and bring them into context before writing
           | code.
           | 
           | Agentic mode is also super helpful for getting LLMs from
           | "99%" correct code to "100%" correct code. I'll ask them to
           | do something to verify their work. This is often when the
           | agent realizes it hallucinated a method name or used a
           | directionally correct, but wrong column name.
        
           | neutronicus wrote:
           | My main interest in agent mode is deputizing the C++ compiler
           | to tell the LLM about everything it has hallucinated.
        
           | mulmen wrote:
           | I think this perspective is better characterized as "solo"
           | and not "old". I don't think your age is relevant here.
           | 
           |  _Senior_ engineers are not necessarily old but have the
           | experience to delegate manageable tasks to peers including
           | juniors and collaborate with stakeholders. They're part of an
           | organization by definition. They're senior to their peers in
           | terms of experience or knowledge, not age.
           | 
           | Agentic AIs slot into this pattern easily.
           | 
           | If you are a _solo_ dev you may not find this valuable. If
           | you are a _senior_ then you probably do.
        
           | pdntspa wrote:
           | 20yrs engineer here, all my life I've dreamed of having
           | something that I could ask general questions about a codebase
           | to and get back a cohesive, useful answer. And that future is
           | now.
        
             | econ wrote:
             | I would put it more generic. I love that one can now ask as
             | many dumb questions as it takes about anything.
             | 
             | With humans there is this point where even the most patient
             | teacher has to move on to do other things. Learning is best
             | when one is curios about something and curiosity is more
             | often specific. (When generic one can just read the manual)
        
         | behnamoh wrote:
         | The difference is this one is backed by Y Combinator.
        
           | glitchc wrote:
           | Does this mean "open source" is really "market capture before
           | becoming closed-source"?
        
             | dang wrote:
             | I've been at many open source meetups with YC founders and
             | can tell you that this is not the thinking at all. Rather,
             | the emphasis is on finding a good carve-line between the
             | open source offering and the (eventual) paid one, so that
             | both sides are viable and can thrive.
             | 
             | Most common these days is to make the paid product be a
             | hosted version of the open source software, but there are
             | other ways too. Experienced founders emphasize to new
             | startups how important it is to get this right and to keep
             | your open source community happy.
             | 
             | No one I've heard is treating open source like a bait and
             | switch; quite the opposite. What is sought is a win-win
             | where each component (open source and paid) does better
             | because of the other.
        
               | danenania wrote:
               | Exactly right.
               | 
               | I think there's a general misconception out there that
               | open sourcing will cannibalize your hosted product
               | business if you make it too easy to run. But in practice,
               | there's not a lot of overlap between people who want to
               | self-host and people who want cloud. Most people who want
               | cloud still want it even if they can self-host with a
               | single command.
        
             | mp5 wrote:
             | One of the founders here - Void will always remain open
             | source! There are plenty of examples of an open source
             | alternative finding its own niche (eg Supabase, Mattermost)
             | and we don't see this being any different.
        
               | dcreater wrote:
               | Are any of those examples vc backed?
        
               | pvg wrote:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23319901
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43763225
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | That doesn't really narrow it down much, YC has backed so
           | many AI coding tools that they've started inbreeding. PearAI
           | (YC Fall '24) is a fork of Continue (YC Summer '23).
           | 
           | https://techcrunch.com/2024/09/30/y-combinator-is-being-
           | crit...
        
         | kristopolous wrote:
         | Void has been around since last year.
         | 
         | I'm working on an agnostic unified framework to make contexts
         | transferrable between these tools.
         | 
         | This will permit zero friction, zero interruption transitions
         | without any code modification.
         | 
         | Should have something to show by next week.
         | 
         | Hit me up if you're interested in working on this problem - I'm
         | tired of cowboying my projects.
        
         | cryptoz wrote:
         | Yup - honestly the space is so open right now still, everyone
         | is trying haha. It's got quite hard to keep track of different
         | models and their strengths / weaknesses, much less the IDE and
         | editor space! I have no idea which of these AI editors would
         | suite me best and a new one comes out like every day.
         | 
         | I'm still in vim with copilot and know I'm missing out. Anyway
         | I'm also adding to the problem as I've got my own too (don't we
         | all?!), at https://codeplusequalsai.com. Coded in vim 'cause I
         | can't decide on an editor!
        
           | jmvldz wrote:
           | This is cool! I like that you have a visual element for the
           | agent working on multiple tickets at a time.
        
             | cryptoz wrote:
             | Thanks! And yeah, it really is satisfying watching the
             | tickets move from column to column "all on their own" as
             | the works gets done!
        
         | dheera wrote:
         | The weird thing is, the biggest reason I don't use Cursor much
         | is because they just distribute this AppImage, which doesn't
         | install or add itself to the Ubuntu app menu, it just sits
         | there and I have to do                   sudo chmod 755
         | path/to/Cursor-0.48.6.x86_64.AppImage
         | path/to/Cursor-0.48.6.x86_64.AppImage
         | 
         | and then I get greeted with an error message:
         | The setuid sandbox is not running as root. Common causes:
         | * An unprivileged process using ptrace on it, like a debugger.
         | * A parent process set prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, ...)
         | Failed to move to new namespace: PID namespaces supported,
         | Network namespace supported, but failed: errno = Operation not
         | permitted
         | 
         | I have to go Googling, then realize I have to run it with
         | bin/appimage/Cursor-0.48.6-x86_64.AppImage --no-sandbox
         | 
         | Often I'm lazy to do all of this and just use the Claude /
         | ChatGPT web version and paste code back and forth to VS code.
         | 
         | The effort required to _start_ Cursor is the reason I don 't
         | use it much. VS code is an actual, bona fide installed app with
         | an icon that sits on my screen, I just click it to launch it.
         | So much easier. Even if I have to write code manually.
        
           | NoahKAndrews wrote:
           | AppImageLauncher improves the AppImage experience a lot,
           | including making sure they get added to the menu. I'm not
           | sure if it makes launching without the sandbox easier or not.
        
         | jmvldz wrote:
         | Coding agents are the future and it's anyone's game right now.
         | 
         | The main reason I think there is such a proliferation is it's
         | not clear what the best interface to coding agents will be. Is
         | it in Slack and Linear? Is it on the CLI? Is it a web interface
         | with a code editor? Is it VS Code or Zed?
         | 
         | Just like everyone has their favored IDE, in a few years time,
         | I think everyone will have their favored interaction pattern
         | for coding agents.
         | 
         | Product managers might like Devin because they don't need to
         | setup an environment. Software engineers might still prefer
         | Cursor because they want to edit the code and run tests on
         | their own.
         | 
         | Cursor has a concept of a shadow workspace and I think we're
         | going to see this across all coding agents. You kick off an
         | async task in whatever IDE you use and it presents the results
         | of the agent in an easy to review way a bit later.
         | 
         | As for Void, I think being open source is valuable on it's own.
         | My understanding is Microsoft could enforce license
         | restrictions at some point down the road to make Cursor
         | difficult to use with certain extensions.
         | 
         | Another YC backed open source VS Code is Continue:
         | https://www.continue.dev/
         | 
         | (Caveat: I am a YC founder building in this space:
         | https://www.engines.dev/)
        
           | handfuloflight wrote:
           | When can we expect a release from Engines?
        
         | andrewpareles wrote:
         | Void dev here! The biggest players in AI code today are full
         | IDEs, not just extensions, and we think that's because they
         | simply feel better to use by having more control over the UX.
         | 
         | There are certainly a lot of alternatives that are plugins(!),
         | but our differentiation right now is being a full open source
         | IDE and having all the features you get out of the big players
         | (quick edits, agent mode, autocomplete, checkpoints).
         | 
         | Surprisingly, all of the big IDEs today
         | (Cursor/Windsurf/Copilot) send your messages through their
         | backend whenever you send a message, and there is no open
         | source full IDE alternative (besides Void). Your connection to
         | providers is direct with Void, and it's a lot easier to spin up
         | your own models/providers and host locally or use whatever
         | provider you want.
         | 
         | We're planning on building Git branching for agents in the next
         | iteration when LLMs are more independent, and controlling the
         | full IDE experience for that will be really important. I worry
         | plugins will struggle.
        
           | bglusman wrote:
           | The versioning and git branching sounds really neat, I think!
           | Can you say more about that? Curious if you've looked at/are
           | considering using Jujutsu/JJ[0] in addition or instead of git
           | for this, I've played with it some, but been considering
           | trying it more with new AI coding stuff, it feels like it
           | could be a more natural fit than actually creating explicit
           | commits for every change, while still tracking them all? Just
           | a thought!
           | 
           | [0]https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj
        
             | jmvldz wrote:
             | I agree the branching sounds super cool!
        
             | danenania wrote:
             | If you're open to something CLI-based, my project
             | Plandex[1] offers git-based branching (and granular
             | versioning) for AI coding. It also has a sandbox (also
             | built on git) that keeps cumulative changes separate from
             | project files until they're ready to apply.
             | 
             | 1 - https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex
        
             | andrewpareles wrote:
             | Interesting, thanks for sharing! We planned on spinning up
             | a new Git branch and shallow Git clone (or possibly
             | worktree/something more optimized) for each agent, and also
             | adding a small auto-merge-with-LLM flow, although something
             | more granular like this might feel better. If we don't use
             | a versioning tool like JJ at first (may just use Git for
             | simplicity at first), we will certainly consider it later
             | on, or might end up building our own.
        
           | elAhmo wrote:
           | Isn't continue.dev also open source and not using 'their
           | backend' when sending stuff? I didn't use it in a while, but
           | I know it had support for llama, local models for tab
           | completions, etc.
        
             | andrewpareles wrote:
             | Continue is doing great work, but they're an extension
             | (plugin)!
        
               | miroljub wrote:
               | What's wrong with a plugin? I don't see the benefit of an
               | IDE over a plugin.
        
               | mp5 wrote:
               | The extensions API lets you control the sidebar, but you
               | basically don't have control over anything in the editor.
               | We wouldn't have been able to build our inline edit
               | feature, or our navigation UI if we were an extension.
        
               | LiveTheDream wrote:
               | Continue.dev is an extension and it does inline edits
               | just fine in VS Code and IntelliJ.
        
               | esperent wrote:
               | Is inline edits the same as diff edits? In that case I
               | think Cline and Roo can do it as well.
        
               | mp5 wrote:
               | If I understand your question correctly - Cline and Roo
               | both display diffs by using built-in VS Code components,
               | while Cursor/Windsurf/Void have built their own custom UI
               | to display diffs. Very small detail, and just a matter of
               | preference.
        
               | esperent wrote:
               | It's about whether the tool can edit just a few lines of
               | the file, or whether it needs to stream the whole file
               | every time - in effect, editing the whole file even
               | though the end result may differ by just a few lines.
               | 
               | I _think_ editing just a part of the file is what Roo
               | calls diff editing, and I 'm asking if this is what the
               | person above means by line edits.
        
               | mp5 wrote:
               | Big fan of Continue btw! There's a small difference in
               | how we handle inline edits - if you've used inline edits
               | in Cursor/Windsurf/Void you'll notice that a box appears
               | above the text you are selecting, and you can type inside
               | of it. This isn't possible with VS Code extensions alone
               | (you _have_ to type into the sidebar).
        
           | huevosabio wrote:
           | So this is closer to Zed than Cursor/Windsurf/Continue,
           | right?
           | 
           | edit: ahh just saw that it is also a fork of VS Code, so it
           | is indeed OSS Cursor
        
             | andrewpareles wrote:
             | Yep, Void is a VSCode fork, but we're definitely not wed to
             | VSCode! Building our own IDE/browser-port is not out of the
             | picture. We'll have to see where the next iteration of
             | tool-use agents takes us, but we strongly feel writing
             | typescript/rust/react is not the endgame when describing
             | algorithms to a computer, and a text-based editor might not
             | be ideal in 10 years, or even 2.
        
           | vunderba wrote:
           | I think it'd be worthwhile to call out in a FAQ/comparison
           | table specifically how something like an "AI powered IDE"
           | such as Cursor/Void differs from just using an IDE + a full-
           | featured agentic plugin (VS Codium + Cline).
        
             | monkpit wrote:
             | I agree, having used Cline I am not sure what advantages
             | this would offer, but I would like to know (beyond things
             | like "it's got an open source ide" - Cline has those too
             | specifically because I can use it in my open source ide)
        
           | jjani wrote:
           | > The biggest players in AI code today are full IDEs, not
           | just extensions,
           | 
           | Claude Code (neither IDE nor extension) is rapidly gaining
           | ground, it's biggest current limitation being cost, which is
           | likely to get resolved sooner rather than later (Gemini Code
           | anyone?). You're right about the _right now_ , but with the
           | pace at which things are moving, the trends are honestly more
           | relevant than the status quo.
        
             | opdahl wrote:
             | > Claude Code (neither IDE nor extension) is rapidly
             | gaining ground
             | 
             | What makes you say that? From what I'm observing it doesn't
             | seem to be talked much about at all.
        
               | olalonde wrote:
               | Claude Code's announcement earned 2k+ point on HN when it
               | launched (7th most popular HN submission this year).
               | 
               | https://hn.algolia.com/?q=claude+code
        
               | opdahl wrote:
               | Together with 3.7 Sonnet. And the claim was that it is
               | rapidly gaining ground, not that it sparked initial
               | interest. I still don't see much proof of adoption. This
               | is actually the first I've heard about anyone actually
               | actively using it since its launch.
        
               | linsomniac wrote:
               | >This is actually the first I've heard about anyone
               | actually actively using it
               | 
               | I've been reaching for Claude Code first for the last
               | couple weeks. They had offered me a $40 credit after I
               | tried it and didn't really use it, maybe 6 weeks ago, but
               | since I've been using it a lot. I've spent that credit
               | and another $30, and it's REALLY good. One thing I like
               | about Claude Code is you can "/init" and it will create a
               | "CLAUDE.md" that saves off it's understanding of the
               | code, and then you can modify it to give it some working
               | knowledge.
               | 
               | I've also tried Codex with OpenAI and o4-mini, and it
               | works very well too, though I have had it crash on me
               | which claude has not.
               | 
               | I did try Codex with Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview, but it is
               | really weird. It seems to not be able to do any editing,
               | it'll say "You need to make these edits to this file (and
               | describe high level fixes) and then come back when you're
               | done and I'll tell you the edits to do to this other
               | file." So that integration doesn't seem to be complete. I
               | had high hopes because of the reviews of the new 2.5 Pro.
               | 
               | I also tried some claude-like use in the AI panel in Zed
               | yesterday, and made a lot of good progress, it seemed to
               | work pretty well, but then at some point it zeroed out a
               | couple files. I think I might have reached a token limit,
               | it was saying "110K out of 200K" but then something else
               | said "120K" and I wonder if that confused it. With Codex
               | you can compact the history, I didn't see that in Zed.
               | Then at some point my Zed switched from editing to
               | needing me to accept every change. I used nearly the
               | entire trial Zed allowance yesterday asking it to
               | impelement a Galaga-inspired game, with varying success.
        
               | jjani wrote:
               | Spending too much time on HN and other spaces (including
               | offline) where people talk about what they're doing.
               | Making LLM-based things has also been my job since pretty
               | much the original release of GPT3.5 which kicked off the
               | whole industry, so I have an excuse.
               | 
               | The big giveaway is that everyone who _has_ tried it
               | agrees that it 's clearly the best agentic coding tool
               | out there. The very few who change back to whatever they
               | were using before (whether IDE fork, extension or
               | terminal agent), do so because of the costs.
               | 
               | Relevant post on the front page right now: A flat pricing
               | subscription for Claude Code [0]. The comment section
               | supports the above as well.
               | 
               | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43931409
        
               | opdahl wrote:
               | I personally tried it and I felt it way more confusing to
               | use compared to using Cursor with Claude 3.7 Sonnet. The
               | CLI interface seems to me more to lend itself for <<vibe
               | coding>> where you actually never work and look with the
               | actual code. That is why I think Cursor and IDEs are more
               | popular than CLI only tools.
        
             | andrewpareles wrote:
             | Just want to share our thinking on terminal-based tools!
             | 
             | We think in 1-2 years people will write code at a systems
             | level, not a function level, and it's not clear to us that
             | you can do that with text. Text-based tools like Claude
             | Code work in our text-based-code systems today, but I think
             | describing algorithms to a computer in the future might
             | involve more diagrams, and terminal will not be ideal.
             | That's our reasoning against building a tool in the
             | terminal, but it clearly works well today, and is the
             | simplest way for the labs to train/run terminal tool-use
             | agents.
        
               | bcrosby95 wrote:
               | Diagrams are great at providing a simplified view of
               | things but they suck ass when it comes to providing
               | details.
               | 
               | There's a reason why fully creating systems from them
               | died 20 years ago - and it wasn't just because the code
               | gen failed. Finding a bug in your spec when its a mess of
               | arrows and connections can be nigh impossible.
               | 
               | Go image search "complex unreal blueprint".
        
               | andrewpareles wrote:
               | This is completely true, and it's a really common
               | objection.
               | 
               | I don't imagine people will want to fully visualize
               | codebases in a giant unified diagram, but I find it hard
               | to imagine that we won't have digests and overviews that
               | at least stray from plaintext in some way.
               | 
               | I think there are a lot of unexplored ways of using AI to
               | create an intelligent overview of a repo and its data
               | structures, or a React project and its components and
               | state, etc.
        
               | abnercoimbre wrote:
               | Terminals aren't too far away from evolving [0] beyond
               | UTF-8 characters. Therefore I suspect IDEs and CLIs will
               | continue their turf wars as always.
               | 
               | > hard to imagine that we won't have digests and
               | overviews
               | 
               | 100% agreed here.
               | 
               |  _Disclosure: I 'm the author of the project below._
               | 
               | [0] https://terminal.click
        
               | ayewo wrote:
               | > I think there are a lot of unexplored ways of using AI
               | to create an intelligent overview of a repo and its data
               | structures, or a React project and its components and
               | state, etc.
               | 
               | Sounds exactly like what DeepWiki is doing from the Devin
               | AI Agent guys: https://deepwiki.com
        
               | conartist6 wrote:
               | You have lost all connection to reality.
               | 
               | Hey by the way I hear all communication between people is
               | going to shift to pictograms soon. You know -- emoji and
               | hieroglyphs. Text just isn't ideal, you know
        
               | km144 wrote:
               | Every system can be translated can be translated to text
               | though. If there is one thing LLMs have essentially
               | _always_ been good at, it is processing written language.
        
             | fuzzythinker wrote:
             | I don't know Claude Code, so if it's "neither IDE nor
             | extension", what is it?
        
               | girvo wrote:
               | It's a CLI tool
        
           | SegmentTree wrote:
           | I think it's worth mentioning that the Theia IDE is a fully
           | open source VS Code-compatible IDE (not a fork of VS Code)
           | that's actively adding AI features with a focus on
           | transparency and hackability.
        
             | andrewpareles wrote:
             | We considered Theia, and even building our own IDE, but
             | obviously VSCode is just the most popular. Theia might be a
             | good play if Microsoft gets more aggressive about VSCode
             | forks, although it's not clear to us that people will be
             | spending their time writing code in 1-2 years. Chances are
             | definitely not 0 that we end up moving away from VSCode as
             | things progress.
        
               | conartist6 wrote:
               | It's the most popular because the tech is decades old.
               | You're all rushing to copy obsolete technology. Now we
               | have 10 copies of an obsolete technology.
               | 
               | We used to know better
        
               | conartist6 wrote:
               | I mean I guess I should thank the 10 teams who forked
               | VSCode for proving beyond all reasonable doubt that
               | VSCode is architecturally obsolete. I was already trying
               | to make that argument, but the 10 forks do it so much
               | better.
        
           | nico wrote:
           | > and there is no open source full IDE alternative (besides
           | Void).
           | 
           | And Zed: https://zed.dev
           | 
           | Yesterday on the front page of HN:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43912844
        
             | slowmovintarget wrote:
             | And Emacs, also mentioned in that thread (by me, but
             | still).
        
             | swyx wrote:
             | this joke could not have been more perfectly set up if it
             | were staged. thanks for the guffaw.
        
               | andrewpareles wrote:
               | I should have been more careful with my wording - I was
               | talking about major VS Code-based IDEs as alternatives.
               | Zed is very impressive, and we've been following them
               | since before Void's launch!
        
           | jeron wrote:
           | openAI chose to acquire windsurf for 3B instead of building
           | something like Void, very curious decision. awesome project,
           | will be closely following this
        
           | lnxg33k1 wrote:
           | >> The biggest players in AI code today are full IDEs, not
           | just extensions
           | 
           | Are you sure? I have some expertise with my IDE, some other
           | extension which solve problems for me, a wide range of them,
           | I've learnt shortcuts, troubleshooting, where and who ask for
           | help, but now you're telling me that I am better off leaving
           | all that behind, and it's better for me? ;o
        
           | _kidlike wrote:
           | Maybe I live in a bubble, but it's surprising to me that
           | nobody mentions Jetbrains in all these discussions. Which in
           | my professional working experience are _the only_ IDEs anyone
           | uses :shrug:
        
             | TingPing wrote:
             | I'm not sure I've met a Jetbrains user in projects I've
             | worked on. It's a paid product so just has a small
             | userbase.
        
               | weberer wrote:
               | Pycharm is extremely popular in the data science world.
               | The Community Edition is free and has 99% of the features
               | most people need. Even when developing with Cursor, I
               | find myself going back to Pycharm just to use the
               | debugger, which I greatly prefer to the debugger used in
               | these VS Code forks.
        
               | TingPing wrote:
               | Lately I've only tried clion, which has no free version.
               | Personally it didn't function as well as vscode for C++.
        
               | hiatus wrote:
               | You may have missed it but they did release a free
               | version of clion recently (for personal use).
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43914705
        
               | whstl wrote:
               | Funny enough, I know a lot of people who work at
               | JetBrains, but only a few end-users.
               | 
               | Their use base is completely different. And we're both in
               | a bubble, I reckon. IntelliJ people also only know a few
               | VSCode users!
        
               | stusmall wrote:
               | Here are some numbers on their user base in real number
               | and dollar amounts:
               | https://www.jetbrains.com/lp/annualreport-2024/
               | 
               | Their tools are wildly popular in many spaces. It isn't
               | for everyone though. It's totally believable in your
               | circle no one uses their tools, but it isn't niche.
        
         | ramoz wrote:
         | You forgot the best one to compare against - Claude Code.
        
           | andrewpareles wrote:
           | We think terminal tools like Claude Code are a good way for
           | research teams to experiment with tool use (obviously pure
           | text), but definitely don't see the terminal as the endgame
           | for these tools.
           | 
           | I know some folks like using the terminal, but if you like
           | Claude Code you should consider plugging your API key into
           | Void and using Claude there! Same exact model and provider
           | and price, but with a UI around the tool calls, checkpoints,
           | etc.
        
             | ramoz wrote:
             | I'm a traditional millennial brat - high preference for UI
             | as well.
             | 
             | That is until I started using Claude Code.
             | 
             | It's not about the terminal. It's just a better UX in
             | general.
        
         | nowittyusername wrote:
         | I've tried many of AI coding IDE's, the best ones like RooCode
         | are good simply because they don't gimp your context. The
         | modern day models are already more then capable enough for many
         | coding tasks, you just need to leave them alone and let them
         | utilize their full context window and all will go well. If you
         | hear a bad experience with any of these IDE's, most of the time
         | its because its limiting use of context or improper management
         | of related functions.
        
         | aylmao wrote:
         | > It feels like everyone and their mother is building coding
         | agents these days.
         | 
         | For real. I think it's because code editors seem to be in that
         | perfect intersection of:
         | 
         | - A tool for programmers. Programmers like building for
         | programmers.
         | 
         | - A tool for productivity. Companies will pay for productivity.
         | 
         | - A tool that's clearly AI-able. VC's will invest in AI tools.
         | 
         | - A tool with plenty of open source lift. The clear, common
         | (and extreme?) example of this being forking VSCode.
         | 
         | Add to that the recent purchase of VSCode-fork [1] Windsurf for
         | $3 billion [2] and I suspect we will see many more of these.
         | 
         | [1]: https://windsurf.com/blog/why-we-built-
         | windsurf#:~:text=This...
         | 
         | [2]: https://community.openai.com/t/openai-is-acquiring-
         | windsurf-...
        
       | johnfn wrote:
       | This is very cool and I'm always happy to see more competition in
       | this space. That said, two suggestions:
       | 
       | - The logo looks like it was inspired directly from the Cursor
       | logo and modified slightly. I would suggest changing it.
       | 
       | - It might be wise to brand yourself as your own thing, not just
       | an "open source Cursor". I tend to have the expectation that
       | "open source [X]" projects are worse than "[X]". Probably unfair,
       | I know.
        
         | freedomben wrote:
         | A minor counterpoint, I personally like the "open source Xyz"
         | because I instantly know what the product is supposed to do.
         | It's also very SEO friendly because you don't know the name of
         | the open source version before you find it, so you can
         | Kagi/Google/DDG "open source Cursor" and get it as a top
         | result, instead of a sea of spammy slime.
        
           | Timwi wrote:
           | > I personally like the "open source Xyz" because I instantly
           | know what the product is supposed to do.
           | 
           | But that assumes that you're already familiar with the non-
           | open-source software referenced. I've never used Cursor so I
           | have no idea what it can or can't do. I'm pretty sure I would
           | never have discovered Inkscape if it had consistently been
           | described as an "open-source Illustrator" as I've simply
           | never used Adobe software.
        
         | mp5 wrote:
         | Thanks for the suggestions - these issues have been a bit
         | painful for us, and we will probably fix them in the next major
         | update to Void.
         | 
         | Believe it or not, the logo similarity was actually
         | unintentional, though I imagine there was subconscious bias at
         | play (we created ours trying to illustrate "a slice of the
         | Void").
        
           | mentos wrote:
           | Maybe the icon is a piece of cake with a sphere void in it?
           | Trying to play on how easy it is - 'it's a piece of cake'
        
       | Demiurge wrote:
       | I don't know anything about the project, I use Zed editor, but I
       | think the logo is really cool.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related:
       | 
       |  _Show HN: Void, an open-source Cursor /GitHub Copilot
       | alternative_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41563958 -
       | Sept 2024 (154 comments)
        
       | evo_9 wrote:
       | If I move off Cursor, it's def not going to be to another vs-code
       | derivative. Zed has it right - build it from the ground up,
       | otherwise, MS is going to kneecap you at some point.
        
         | threatofrain wrote:
         | The threat is Msft cutting you off from the ecosystem. That
         | means growing an ecosystem and not merely the editor.
        
         | owebmaster wrote:
         | Great to see more people thinking this way, finally. Would be
         | even better to see the same change wrt typescript, another MS
         | trojan horse.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | 100%. Microsoft can't interfere with Zed.
         | 
         | Additionally, Zed is written in Rust and has robust hardware-
         | accelerated rendering. This has a tangible feel that other
         | editors do not. It feels just so smooth, unlike clunky
         | heavyweight JetBrains products. And it feels solid and sturdy,
         | unlike VS Code buffers, which feel like creaky webviews.
        
         | conartist6 wrote:
         | Zed didn't build from the ground up though. I mean, they did
         | for a lot of stuff, but crucially they decided to rely on the
         | LSP ecosystem so most of the investment in improving Zed is
         | also a direct investment in improving VSCode.
         | 
         | If you can't invest in yourself without making the same size
         | investment in your competitor, you probably have no path to
         | actually win out over that competitor.
        
       | diamondfist25 wrote:
       | I've been using Claude coder, I like this exp way more than these
       | ai ides way more.
        
       | leogout wrote:
       | I subscribed to the mailing list of void long ago to be notified
       | once the alpha opens, but i've never recieved anything. I forgot
       | about it until today.
        
         | mp5 wrote:
         | We've been holding off on this until Void is out of Beta.
        
       | alp1n3-dev wrote:
       | The time to sell a VSCode fork for 3B was a week ago. If someone
       | wants to move off of VSCode, why would they move to a fork of it
       | instead of to Zed, JetBrains, or a return to the terminal?
       | 
       | Next big sale is going to be something like "Chrome Fork + AI +
       | integrated inter-app MCP". Brave is eh, Arc is being left to die
       | on its own, and Firefox is... doing nothing.
        
       | setnone wrote:
       | This is realy cool and checks my privacy boxes, great name too. I
       | will be testing it out and will consider contributing.
       | 
       | One thing i'd really like to have is a manual order for folders
       | or even files in the explorer view.
        
       | mentalgear wrote:
       | Nice - also open competition is always good for users!
        
       | dkersten wrote:
       | Yet another vscode fork...
        
       | antirez wrote:
       | Mandatory reminder that "agentic coding" works way worse than
       | just using the LLM directly, steering it ad needed, filling the
       | gaps, and so forth. The value is in the semantical capabilities
       | of the LLM itself: wrapping it will make it more convenient to
       | use, but always less powerful.
        
         | rcarmo wrote:
         | I beg to disagree, Salvatore... Have a go at VS Code with Agent
         | mode turned on (you'll need a paid plan to use Claude and/or
         | Gemini, I think). It gets me out of vim, so yeah, it's that
         | good. :)
         | 
         | Tip: Write a SPEC.md file first. Ask the LLM to ask _you_ about
         | what might be missing from the spec, and once you "agree" ask
         | it to update the SPEC.md or create a TODO.md.
         | 
         | Then iterate on the code. Ask it to implement one of the
         | features, hand-tune and ask it to check things against the
         | SPEC.md and update both files as needed.
         | 
         | Works great for me, especially when refactoring--the SPEC.md
         | grounds Claude enough for it not to go off-road. Gemini is a
         | bit more random...
        
           | antirez wrote:
           | Interacting with the LLM directly _is_ more work. What I mean
           | is that a wrapper in the best conditions will not damage too
           | much the quality of the LLM itself. In the chat, you
           | continuously avoid suboptimal choices executed by the model,
           | if you are a very experienced code, and a fix here, a fix
           | there, you continuously avoid local minima. After a few
           | iterations you find that your whole project is a lot better
           | designed than otherwise.
        
             | rcarmo wrote:
             | Oh, sure. I don't rely on the LLM to write all the code. I
             | do "trust" it to refactor things to a shape I want, and to
             | automate chores like moving chunks of code around or build
             | a quick wrapper for a library.
             | 
             | One thing I particularly don't like about LLMs is that
             | their Python code feels like Java cosplay (full of
             | pointless classes and methods), so my SPEC.md usually has a
             | section on code style right at the start :)
        
       | Inuit wrote:
       | Here comes another. Everyone saw that 3B Windsurf money and
       | production go brrr
        
         | mp5 wrote:
         | Void actually launched before the Windsurf IDE existed!
         | 
         | http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42127882
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41563958
        
       | monoid73 wrote:
       | Another one? People saw that 3B windsurf money.
        
       | apostle36 wrote:
       | Open source and not available on Linux?
        
         | lnenad wrote:
         | Yeah this surprised me as well lol
        
       | sunnybeetroot wrote:
       | Given Void is backed by Ycombinator, what's the business plan to
       | start generating revenue?
        
         | mp5 wrote:
         | This is a good question. Because we're open source, we will
         | always allow you to host models locally for free, or use your
         | own API key. This makes monetization a bit difficult in the
         | short term. As with many devtool companies, the long-term value
         | comes from enterprise sales.
        
         | elAhmo wrote:
         | There is no plan with YC in this space, everything is just
         | basically vibe investing and hoping something sticks.
         | 
         | Continue.dev also received investment from YC. Remember PearAI?
         | Very charismatic founders that just forked Continue.dev and got
         | a YC investment [1].
         | 
         | https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/20/after-causing-outrage-on-t...
        
       | hintymad wrote:
       | A trajectory question: do we still have the debate that whether
       | open-source software takes away SDE jobs or makes the pie grow
       | bigger to create more jobs? The booming OS community in the past
       | seem have created multiple billion-dollar markets. On the other
       | hand, we have a lot less growth than before now, and I was
       | wondering if OSS has started to suppressing the demand of SDEs.
        
       | moffkalast wrote:
       | > Welcome to Void.
       | 
       | Flaskbacks to that pretty good Voyager episode.
        
       | guybedo wrote:
       | fwiw here's a more structured/organized version of this thread:
       | https://extraakt.com/extraakts/void-ai-coding-tool-discussio...
        
         | mdaniel wrote:
         | "Structured," eh?
         | 
         | Anyway, I didn't know what your service was trying to do so I
         | clicked on the homepage, clicked Sources to see what else was
         | there, it cited
         | <https://extraakt.com/extraakts?source=reddit#:~:text=Open-
         | so...> but the hyperlink took me back to the HN thing, which
         | defeats the purpose of having a source picker
        
       | fcoury wrote:
       | One thing I noticed is that there's no cost tracking, so it's
       | very hard to predict how much you're spending. This is fine on
       | tools like Cursor that are all inclusive, but is something that
       | is really necessary if you're bringing your own API keys.
       | 
       | Is this feature on the roadmap?
        
         | mp5 wrote:
         | This is a great suggestion. We're actually storing the
         | input/output costs of most models, but aren't computing cost
         | estimates yet. Definitely something to add. My only hesitation
         | is that token-based cost estimates may not be accurate (most
         | models do not provide their tokenizers, so you have to eg.
         | estimate the average number of characters per token in order to
         | compute the cost, and this may vary per model).
        
           | mcintyre1994 wrote:
           | It'd probably be useful to just show cost after the fact
           | based on the usage returned from the API. Even if I don't
           | know how much my first request will cost, if I know my last
           | request cost x cents then I can probably have a good idea
           | from there.
        
       | andrewmunsell wrote:
       | Given that there's a dozen agentic coding IDEs, I only use Cursor
       | because of the few features they have like auto-identification of
       | the next cursor location (I find myself hitting tab-tab-tab-tab a
       | lot, it speeds up repetitive edits). Are there any other IDEs
       | that implement these QOL features, including Void (given it touts
       | itself specifically as a Cursor alternative)?
        
         | ramoz wrote:
         | I think QOL will shift away from your keyboard. Give Claude
         | Code a try and you'll understand what I mean. Developer UX will
         | shift away from traditional IDEs. At this point I could use
         | notepad for the the type of manual work I do vs how I
         | orchestrate Claude Code.
        
           | andrewmunsell wrote:
           | The reason I have never bothered with Claude Code (or even
           | other agentic tools), is that I still code mostly by hand.
           | 
           | When I am using LLMs, I know exactly what the code _should_
           | be and just am using it as a way to produce it faster (my
           | Cursor rules are extremely extensive and focused on my
           | personal architecture and code style, and I share them across
           | all my personal projects), rather than producing a whole
           | _feature_. When I try and use just the agent in Cursor, it
           | always needs significant modifications and reorganization to
           | meet my standards, even with the extensive rules I have set
           | up.
           | 
           | Cursor appeals to me because those QOL features don't take
           | away the actual code writing part, but instead augment it and
           | get rid of some of the tedium.
        
       | nektro wrote:
       | one of these is gonna have malware and we'll wonder how we never
       | saw it
        
       | w10-1 wrote:
       | May I ask why did you decide against starting with (Eclipse)
       | Theia instead of VSCode?
       | 
       | It's compatible but has better integration and modularity, and
       | doing so might insulate you a bit from your rather large
       | competitor controlling your destiny.
       | 
       | Or is the exit to be bought by Microsoft? By OpenAI? And thus to
       | more closely integrate?
       | 
       | If you're open-source but derivative, can they not simply steal
       | your ideas? Or will your value depend on having a lasting hold on
       | your customers?
       | 
       | I'm really happy there are full-fledged IDE alternatives, but I
       | find the hub-and-spoke model where VSCode/MS is the only decider
       | of integration patterns is a real problem. LSP has been a race to
       | the bottom, feature-wise, though it really simplified IDE support
       | for small languages.
        
       | soylentEnjoyer wrote:
       | BYOK
       | 
       | We live in the age of dev tools
        
       | BeetleB wrote:
       | Feedback 1: The README really needs more details. What does it
       | do/not do? Don't assume people have used Cursor. If it is a
       | Cursor alternative, does it support all of Cursor's features?
       | 
       | As a non-Cursor user who does AI programming, there is nothing
       | there to make me want to try it out.
       | 
       | Feedback 2: I feel any new agentic AI tool for programming should
       | have a comparison against Aider[1] which for me is the tool to
       | benchmark against. Can you give a compelling reason to use this
       | over Aider? Don't just say "VSCode" - I'm sure there are
       | extensions for VSCode that work with Aider.
       | 
       | As an example of the questions I have:
       | 
       | - Does it have something like Aider's repomap (or better)?
       | 
       | - To what granularity can I limit the context?
       | 
       | [1] https://aider.chat/
        
         | andrewpareles wrote:
         | Thanks for the feedback. We'll definitely add a feature list.
         | To answer your question, yes - we support Cursor's features
         | (quick edits, agent mode, chat, inline edits, links to
         | files/folders, fast apply, etc) using open source and openly-
         | available models (for example, we haven't trained our own
         | autocomplete model, but you can bring any autocomplete model or
         | "FIM" model).
         | 
         | We don't have a repomap or codebase summary - right now we're
         | relying on .voidrules and Gather/Agent mode to look around to
         | implement large edits, and we find that works decently well,
         | although we might add something like an auto-summary or Aider's
         | repomap before exiting Beta.
         | 
         | Regarding context - you can customize the context window and
         | reserved amount of token space for each model. You can also use
         | "@ to mention" to include entire files and folders, limited to
         | the context window length. (you can also customize the model's
         | reasoning ability, think tags to parse, tool use format
         | (gemini/openai/anthropic), FIM support, etc).
        
           | throwup238 wrote:
           | An important Cursor feature that no one else seems to have
           | implemented yet is documentation indexing. You give it a base
           | URL and it crawls and generates embeddings for API
           | documentation, guides, tutorials, specifications, RFCs, etc
           | in a very language agnostic way. That plus an agent tool to
           | do fuzzy or full text search on those same docs would also be
           | nice. Referring to those @docs in the context works really
           | well to ground the LLMs and eliminate API hallucinations
           | 
           | Back in 2023 one of the cursor devs mentioned [1] that they
           | first convert the HTML to markdown then do n-gram
           | deduplication to remove nav, headers, and footers. The state
           | of the art for chunking has probably gotten a lot better
           | though.
           | 
           | [1] https://forum.cursor.com/t/how-does-docs-crawling-
           | work/264/3
        
             | RobinL wrote:
             | I agree that on the face of it this is extremely useful. I
             | tried using it for multiple libraries and it was a complete
             | failure though, it failed to crawl fairly standard mkdocs
             | and sphynx sites. I guess it's better for the 'built in'
             | ones that they've pre-indexed
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | I use it mostly to index stuff like Rust docs on docs.rs
               | and rendered mdbooks. The RAG is hit or miss but I
               | haven't had trouble getting things indexed.
        
             | steveharman wrote:
             | Just use the Context7 MCP ? Actually I'm assuming Void
             | supports MCP.
        
               | andrewpareles wrote:
               | Agreed - this is one of the better solutions today.
        
               | Aeroi wrote:
               | can you elaborate on how context7 handles document
               | indexing or web crawling. If i connect to the mcp server,
               | will it be able to crawl websites fed to it?
        
               | gesman wrote:
               | Context7 is missing lots of info pieces from the repos it
               | indexing and getting overbloated with similar sounding
               | repos, which is becoming confusing for LLM's.
        
             | andrewpareles wrote:
             | This is a good point.We've stayed away from documentation
             | assuming that it's more of a browser agent task, and I
             | agree with other commenters that this would make a good MCP
             | integration.
             | 
             | I wonder if the next round of models trained on tool-use
             | will be good at looking at documentation. That might solve
             | the problem completely, although OSS and offline models
             | will need another solution. We're definitely open to trying
             | things out here, and will likely add a browser-using docs
             | scraper before exiting Beta.
        
             | mapmap wrote:
             | The continue.dev plugin for Visual Studio Code provides
             | documentation indexing. You provide a base URL and a tag.
             | The plugin then scrapes the documentation and builds a RAG
             | index. This allows you to use the documentation as context
             | within chat. For example, you could ask @godotengine what
             | is a sprite?
        
               | conartist6 wrote:
               | So this is why everything is going behind Anubis then?
        
               | GreenWatermelon wrote:
               | Nah, Anubis combats systematic Scraping of the web by
               | data scrapers, not actual user agents.
        
               | conartist6 wrote:
               | A scraper in this case is the agent of the user. Doesn't
               | make it not a scraper that can and will get trapped.
        
             | lgiordano_notte wrote:
             | Cursor's doc indexing is acc one of the few AI coding
             | features that feels like it saves time. Embedding full doc
             | sites, deduping nav/header junk, then letting me reference
             | @docs inline actually improves context grounding instead of
             | guessing APIs.
        
           | satvikpendem wrote:
           | Do you support @Docs?
           | 
           | https://docs.cursor.com/context/@-symbols/@-docs
        
         | _345 wrote:
         | Am I the only one that has had bad experiences with aider? For
         | me each time I've tried it, I had to wrestle with and beg the
         | AI to do what I wanted it to do, almost always ending in me
         | just taking over and doing it myself.
         | 
         | If nearly everytime I use it to accomplish something it gets it
         | 40-85% correct and I have to go in to fix the other 60-15%,
         | what is the point? It's as slow as hand writing code then, if
         | not slower, and my flow with Continue is simply better:
         | 
         | 1. CTRL L block of code 2. Ask a question or give a task 3. I
         | read what it says and then apply the change myself by CTRL C
         | and then tweaking the one or two little things it inevitably
         | misunderstood about my system and its requirements
        
           | attentive wrote:
           | That depends on models you use and your prompts.
           | 
           | Use gemini-2.5pro or sonnet3.5/3.7 or gpt-4.1
           | 
           | Be as specific and detailed in your prompts as you can.
           | Include the right context.
        
             | dingnuts wrote:
             | and what do you do if you value privacy and don't want to
             | share everything in your project with silicon valley, or
             | you don't want to spend $8/hr to watch Claude do your hobby
             | for you?
             | 
             | I'm getting really tired of AI advocates telling me that AI
             | is as good as the hype if I just pay more (say, fellow
             | HNer, your paycheck doesn't come from those models, does
             | it?), or use the "right" prompt. Give some examples.
             | 
             | If I have to write a prompt as long as Claude's system
             | prompt in order to get reliable edits, I'm not sure I've
             | saved any time at all.
             | 
             | At least you seem to be admitting that aider is useless
             | with local models. That's certainly my experience.
        
               | wredcoll wrote:
               | I haven't used local models. I don't have the 60+gb of
               | vram to do so.
               | 
               | I've tested aider with gemini2.5 with prompts as basic as
               | 'write a ts file with pupeteer to load this url, click on
               | button identified by x, fill in input y, loop over these
               | urls' and it performed remarkably well.
               | 
               | Llm performance is 100% dependent on the model you're
               | using so you ca hardly generalize from a small model you
               | run locally on a cpu.
        
               | mp5 wrote:
               | Local models just aren't there yet in terms of being able
               | to host locally on your laptop without extra hardware.
               | 
               | We're hoping that one of the big labs will distill an ~8B
               | to ~32B parameter model that performs SOTA benchmarks!
               | This would be huge both in cost and probably make it
               | reasonable for most people to code with agents in
               | parallel.
        
               | NewsaHackO wrote:
               | Is this post just you yelling at the wind? What does this
               | have to do with the post you replied to?
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > At least you seem to be admitting that aider is useless
               | with local models. That's certainly my experience.
               | 
               | I don't see it as an admission. I'd wager 99% of Aider
               | users simply haven't tried local models.
               | 
               | Although I would expect they would be much worse than
               | Sonnet, etc.
               | 
               | > I'm getting really tired of AI advocates telling me
               | that AI is as good as the hype if I just pay more (say,
               | fellow HNer, your paycheck doesn't come from those
               | models, does it?), or use the "right" prompt. Give some
               | examples.
               | 
               | Examples? Aider is a great tool and much (probably most)
               | of it is written by AI.
        
               | wkat4242 wrote:
               | This is exactly the issue I have with copilot in office.
               | It doesn't learn from my style so I have to be very
               | specific how I want things. At that point it's quicker to
               | just write it myself.
               | 
               | Perhaps when it can dynamically learn on the go this will
               | be better. But right now it's not terribly useful.
        
               | mp5 wrote:
               | I really wonder why dynamic learning hasn't been explored
               | more. It would be a huge moat for the labs (everyone
               | would have to host and dynamically train their own model
               | with a major lab). Seems like it would make the AI way
               | smarter too.
        
               | troupo wrote:
               | > or use the "right" prompt. Give some examples.
               | 
               | There's no such thing as a "right prompt". It's all snake
               | oil. https://dmitriid.com/prompting-llms-is-not-
               | engineering
        
           | CuriouslyC wrote:
           | Aider is quite configurable, you need to look at the
           | leaderboard and copy one of the high performing model/config
           | setups. Additionally, you need to autoload files such as the
           | readme and coding guidelines for your project.
           | 
           | Aider's killer features are integration of automated
           | lint/typecheck/test and fix loops with git checkpointing. If
           | you're not setting up these features you aren't getting the
           | full value proposition from it.
        
             | larusso wrote:
             | Never used the tool. But it seems both aider and cursor are
             | not at their strongest out of the box? I read similar thing
             | about cursor and doing custom configuration so it picks up
             | coding guidelines etc etc. Is there some kind of agreed
             | best practice standard that is documented or just try and
             | error best practices from users sharing these?
        
               | CuriouslyC wrote:
               | Aider's leaderboard is a baseline "best practice" for
               | model/edit format/mode selection. Beyond that, it's
               | basically whatever you think are best practices in
               | engineering and code style, which you should capture in
               | documents that can serve double duty both for AI and for
               | human contributors. Given that a lot of this stuff is
               | highly contentious it's really up to you as to pick and
               | choose what you prefer.
        
         | satvikpendem wrote:
         | > _The README really needs more details. What does it do /not
         | do? Don't assume people have used Cursor. If it is a Cursor
         | alternative, does it support all of Cursor's features?_
         | 
         | That's all in the website, not the README, but yes a bulleted
         | list or identical info from the site would work well.
        
         | SafeDusk wrote:
         | I've used both Cursor and Aider but I've always wanted
         | something simple that I have full control on, if not just to
         | understand how they work. So I made a minimal coding agent
         | (with edit capability) that is fully functional using only
         | seven tools: read, write, diff, browse, command, ask, and
         | think.
         | 
         | I can just disable `ask` tool for example to have it easily go
         | full autonomous on certain tasks.
         | 
         | Have a look at https://github.com/aperoc/toolkami to see if it
         | might be useful for you.
        
           | larusso wrote:
           | Will check this out. I like to have a bit more control over
           | my stack if possible.
        
       | MantisShrimp90 wrote:
       | Projects like this are great because open source versions need to
       | figure out the right way to do things, rather than the hacky,
       | closed, proprietary alternatives that pop up first and are just
       | trying to consume as many users as possible to get a most
       | quickly.
       | 
       | In that case, a shitty, closed system is good actually because
       | it's another thing your users will need to "give up" if they move
       | to an alternative. By contrast, an open ide like void will
       | hopefully make headway on an open interface between ides and the
       | llm agents in such a way that it can be adapted by neovim people
       | like me or anyone else for that matter
        
       | alisinabh wrote:
       | Zed (https://zed.dev/agentic) also released agentic code edits
       | (similar to Cursor) which I tried and really like.
        
         | WD-42 wrote:
         | And it's not yet another editor running in a web browser which
         | is really, really nice.
        
           | ramon156 wrote:
           | Its _fast_. Love it !
        
           | muppetman wrote:
           | Doesn't it need to download a massive nodejs binary to be
           | useful?
        
             | WD-42 wrote:
             | For what?
        
               | TiredOfLife wrote:
               | Just for syntax highlighting no. But for any ide like
               | features it need language servers and some of them are
               | node based.
               | 
               | https://zed.dev/docs/languages
        
               | muppetman wrote:
               | I dunno, you tell me? https://github.com/zed-
               | industries/zed/issues/12589
        
               | WD-42 wrote:
               | Right. "To be useful" includes leveraging language
               | servers, which they aren't going to write from scratch.
               | So what's your point?
        
           | hu3 wrote:
           | Clearly. Zed wouldn't have blurry text rendering on some
           | resolutions if they did.
           | 
           | Issue has been open for over a year.
           | 
           | https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/7992
        
             | alfiedotwtf wrote:
             | I just wish it had a fallback if Vulcan wasn't installed...
             | I would love to run Zed inside a docker container so that
             | naughty plugins don't misbehave
        
         | minzi wrote:
         | Its agent is a lot worse than Cursor's in my experience so far.
         | Even tab edits feel worse.
         | 
         | My understanding is that these are not custom models but a
         | combination of prompting and steering. That makes Cursor's
         | performance relative to others pretty surprising to me. Are
         | they just making more requests? I wonder what the secret sauce
         | is.
        
       | badmonster wrote:
       | Congrats void!!
        
       | simultsop wrote:
       | The branding looks quiet strange and very conflicting with
       | voidzero.dev
        
       | ahamilton454 wrote:
       | The irony of an open source alternative to a fork of an open
       | source project is hopefully not lost here
        
       | wg0 wrote:
       | And just that much maot each AI wrapper has.
        
       | whatever1 wrote:
       | Here have 10B$
        
       | zitterbewegung wrote:
       | Would be helpful for you to be in homebrew.
        
       | hoakiet98 wrote:
       | Been following this project from very earlier on. It's awesome to
       | see how much ground you covered in just a few months!
        
       | _pdp_ wrote:
       | On a tangent, I get the feeling that the more senior you are, the
       | less likely you are to end up using one of these VIDEs. If you do
       | use any coding assistants at all, it will mostly be for the auto-
       | complete feature - no 'agent mode' malarkey.
       | 
       | Would you say this is true?
        
         | codybontecou wrote:
         | Maybe it's just me, but the auto-complete is very distracting
         | and something I avoid. Most of the time I'm fighting it,
         | deleting or denying it's suggestions, and it throws me out of
         | flow.
         | 
         | From what I've seen, most senior/staff-level engineers are
         | working for big corps which have limited contracts with
         | providers like Github Copilot, which until recently only gave
         | access to autocomplete.
         | 
         | I prefer the web-based interface. It feels like my choice to
         | reference a tool. It's easy to run multiple chats at once,
         | running prompts against multiple models.
        
           | _pdp_ wrote:
           | That's very interesting. This is certainly what I was doing
           | before Copilot. Now I let it autocomplete but only sometimes
           | when it makes sense. I guess I am used to the keybinds so
           | that I can undo if I don't like it.
           | 
           | When I was reading your comment I thought that there is a
           | space for an out-of-flow coding assistant, i.e. rather than
           | deploy an entire IDE with extension, the assistant can be
           | just a floating window (I guess chatgpt does that) and is
           | able to dive in and out or just suggest as you type along.
        
         | rgoulter wrote:
         | When browsing a GitHub repo, there's an option for "assistive
         | chat" with copilot. -- I've found this a useful interface to
         | get the LLM to answer quick questions about the repository
         | without having to dig through myself.
         | 
         | Beyond autocomplete, I've found the LLM to be useful in some
         | cases: sometimes you'll want to make edits which are quite
         | automatic, but can't quite be covered by refactoring tools, and
         | are a bit more involved than search/replace. LLMs can handle
         | that quite well.
         | 
         | For unfamiliar domains, it's also useful to be able to ask an
         | LLM to troubleshoot / identify problems in code.
        
       | didip wrote:
       | Can you tell me what's the difference between this and Continue?
        
       | asynchronousx wrote:
       | If this supports connecting with locally hosted models this is
       | actually a HUGE deal
        
       | l-albertovich wrote:
       | I've just installed it and tried to have it create a hello world
       | using gemma3:27b-it-qat through ollama but it refused to do it
       | claiming it doesn't have access to my filesystem.
       | 
       | Then I opened an existing file and asked it to modify a function
       | to return a fixed value and it did the same.
       | 
       | I'm an absolute newb in this space so if I'm doing something
       | stupid I'd appreciate it if you helped me correct it because I
       | already had the C/C++ extension complain that it can only be used
       | in "proper vscode" (I imported my settings from vscode using the
       | wizard) and when this didn't work either it didn't spark joy as
       | Marie Kondo would say.
       | 
       | Please don't get me wrong, I gave this a try because I like the
       | idea of having a proper local open source IDE where I can run my
       | own models (even if it's slower) and have control over my data.
       | I'm genuinely interested in making this work.
       | 
       | Thanks!
        
         | andrewpareles wrote:
         | Thanks for writing! Can you try mentioning the file with "@"?
         | Smaller models sometimes don't realize that they should look
         | for files and folders, but "@" always gives the full context of
         | whatever is in the file/folder directly to them.
         | 
         | Small OSS models are going to get better at this when there's
         | more of a focus on tool-use, which we're expecting in the next
         | iteration of models.
        
           | fendy3002 wrote:
           | That's what happen? Also happens with cascade base when using
           | windsurf, need a ./ Prefix for it to get the file
        
       | renjimen wrote:
       | As a data scientist, my main gripe with all these AI-centric IDEs
       | is that they don't provide data centric tools for exploring
       | complex data structures inherent to data science. AI cannot tell
       | me about my data, only my code.
       | 
       | I'll be sticking with VSCode until:
       | 
       | - Notebooks are first class objects. I develop Python packages
       | but notebooks are essential for scratch work in data centric
       | workflows
       | 
       | - I can explore at least 2D data structures interactively
       | (including parquet). The Data Wrangler in VSCode is great for
       | this
        
         | 3abiton wrote:
         | I saw recently a framework that was interacting directly with
         | notebook. But I forgot what was it. Everyday there is a new
         | thing.
        
       | sach1 wrote:
       | How is it that the open source Cursor 'alternative' doesn't have
       | a linux option (either via AppImage, as Cursor offers, or
       | something like a flatpak). I understand that open source does not
       | automatically mean linux, but it is like, weird right?
        
         | Timwi wrote:
         | No, not really. It's not really your place to dictate what
         | someone enjoys working on.
        
           | sach1 wrote:
           | That's a bit aggressive. Who hurt you?
        
         | amytimed wrote:
         | just looked and it does
         | https://github.com/voideditor/binaries/releases
         | 
         | AppImage, .deb, .tar.gz
        
           | sach1 wrote:
           | Aw sweet, I only checked their website download page and
           | missed that. Thank you!
        
       | branon wrote:
       | Disappointing name! You are colliding with https://voidlinux.org/
       | among probably many other much more significant pieces of
       | software.
        
       | helsinki wrote:
       | If this isn't as good as or better than Avante.nvim, I'm going to
       | be quite sad.
        
       | almosthere wrote:
       | We gotta stop making full vscodes, and just make extensions...
       | Bleh
        
       | ez8 wrote:
       | Make it disable all the telemetry by default
        
       | cranberryturkey wrote:
       | no linux version? pfft. rookies
        
       | bhuga wrote:
       | There's so much happening in this space, but I still haven't seen
       | what would be the killer feature for me: dual-mode operation in
       | IDE and CLI.
       | 
       | In a project where I already have a lot of linting brought into
       | the editor, I want to be able to reuse that linting in a headless
       | mode: start something at the CLI, then hop into the IDE when it
       | says it's done or needs help. I'd be able to see the conversation
       | up to that point and the agent would be able to see my linting
       | errors before I start using it in the IDE. For a large, existing
       | codebase that will require a lot of guardrails for an agent to be
       | successful, it's disheartening to imagine splitting customization
       | efforts between separate CLI and IDE tools.
       | 
       | For me so far, cursor's still the state of the art. But it's hard
       | to go all-in on it if I'll also have to go all-in on a CLI system
       | in parallel. Do any of the tools that are coming out have the
       | kind of dual-mode operation I'm interested in? There's so many
       | it's hard to even evaluate them all.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | I posted this the other day, but didn't get a response:
         | 
         | Does anyone think this model of "tool" + "curated model
         | aggregator" + "open source" would be useful for other, non-
         | developer fields? For instance, would an AI art tool with
         | sculpting and drawing benefit from being open source?
         | 
         | I've talked with VCs that love open source developer tools, but
         | they seem to hate on the idea of "open creative tools" for
         | designers, illustrators, filmmakers, and other creatives. They
         | say these folks don't benefit from open source. I don't quite
         | get it, because Blender and Krita have millions of users.
         | (ComfyUI is already kind of in that space, it's just not very
         | user-friendly.)
         | 
         | Why do investors seem to want non-developer things to be closed
         | source? Are they right?
        
           | bix6 wrote:
           | I think it's mostly a value capture thing. More money to be
           | made hooking devs in then broke creatives and failing studios
           | (no offense, it just seems like creatives are getting crushed
           | right now). In one case you're building for the tech
           | ecosystem, in the other for the arts. VC will favor tech,
           | higher multiples. Closed source is more protected from theft
           | etc in many cases.
           | 
           | But as you point out there are great solutions so it's
           | clearly not a dead end path.
        
       | pacoxu2025 wrote:
       | https://github.com/yetone/avante.nvim/ is another choice.
        
       | mdrzn wrote:
       | I mostly use Cursor for the monthly flat pricing which allows me
       | unlimited (slow) calls to most LLMs (Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude 3.7,
       | etc) without worrying about spending anything more than
       | $20/month.
        
       | welder wrote:
       | I bet OpenAI feels kinda silly now that they just paid $3B for
       | Windsurf when they could have backed an OSS one for much less.
        
         | sumedh wrote:
         | Windsurf probably has recurring revenue.
        
       | exe34 wrote:
       | Has anyone had success running it on NixOS? I have an account
       | with deepinfra which I'd like to try with this.
       | 
       | Sadly when I try to add a model, I get the error: > Error while
       | encrypting the text provided to safeStorage.encryptString.
       | Encryption is not available
       | 
       | vscode and Cursor work perfectly fine this way:
       | 
       | > nix-shell -p appimage-run > [nix-shell:~/Downloads]$ appimage-
       | run Cursor-0.49.6-x86_64.AppImage
        
       | figmert wrote:
       | Side note: is there an AI app that sets up a full initial SaaS
       | app based on prompts? I'm struggling to get something like Cursor
       | to behave correctly.
        
         | slig wrote:
         | Not exactly what you're asking but: have you tried some
         | Boilerplate SaaS thing?
        
           | ch1234 wrote:
           | What products are in this space?
        
             | slig wrote:
             | There are tons. You can look up "saas boilerplate
             | $your_stack".
        
         | underlines wrote:
         | vibe coding oriented builders, where you draft an app idea and
         | it gives you a prototype?
         | 
         | I'd say Firebase Studio and OpenHands
        
       | maouida wrote:
       | What we need is not an editor. We need a coding agent server
       | which we can use from any editor we want.
        
         | terhechte wrote:
         | There's aider (https://aider.chat) or Claude Code
         | (https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/overview) or
         | Codex (https://github.com/openai/codex) or plandex
         | (https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex) or kwaak
         | (https://github.com/bosun-ai/kwaak)
         | 
         | I'd venture to say there's more of these than there are UI
         | Editors tbh.
        
       | underlines wrote:
       | I wonder why most agentic patterns don't use multiple different
       | retrieval strategies simultaneously and why most of them don't
       | use CodeGraph 1 during discovery phase. Embeddings aren't enough,
       | Agent induced function/class name search isn't enough.
       | 
       | [1] CodeGraph https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.13863
        
       | underlines wrote:
       | We need an Eval Leaderboard for LLM assisted Agentic IDEs. The
       | space is getting crowded:
       | 
       | New Editors:
       | 
       | - Firebase Studio
       | 
       | - Zed
       | 
       | - OpenHands (OSS Devin Clone)
       | 
       | VS Code Forks:
       | 
       | - Cursor
       | 
       | - Windsurf Editor
       | 
       | - Void
       | 
       | VS Code Extensions:
       | 
       | - Gemini Code Assist
       | 
       | - Continue.dev
       | 
       | - GitHub Copilot Agent Mode
       | 
       | - Cline
       | 
       | - RooCode
       | 
       | - Kilo Code (RooCode + Cline Fork)
       | 
       | - Windsurf Plugin
       | 
       | - Kodu.ai Claude Coder (not claude code!)
       | 
       | Terminal Agents:
       | 
       | - Aider
       | 
       | - Claude Code
       | 
       | - OpenAI codex
       | 
       | Issue Fixing Agents:
       | 
       | - SWE-agent
        
         | paradite wrote:
         | Missing OpenAI Codex cli
         | 
         | Also missing a class of non-IDE desktop apps like 16x Prompt
         | and Repo Prompt.
        
           | underlines wrote:
           | Thanks. I added codex.
           | 
           | Though, since I specifically mentioned agentic, I wanted to
           | exclude non-agentic tools like prompt builders and context
           | managers that you linked. :)
           | 
           | Reason being: my idea of agents is to generalize well enough,
           | so the need for workflow based apps isn't needed anymore.
           | 
           | During discovery and planning phase, the agents should
           | traverse the code base with a retrieval strategy packaged as
           | a tool (embedded search, code-graphs, ...) and then add that
           | new knowledge to the plan before executing the code changes.
        
             | paradite wrote:
             | I don't think it's a black and white distinction between
             | agentic and non-agentic tools. Not to mention tools are
             | constantly evolving and changing.
             | 
             | For example, Cursor a year ago was not agentic at all.
             | GitHub Copilot only recently added agentic features.
             | 
             | I also think the end game for an agentic tool would not an
             | IDE, because IDE was designed for human workflows, not
             | agents.
             | 
             | I wrote about this topic a while ago and made a
             | classification that's probably a bit outdated, but still
             | relevant: https://prompt.16x.engineer/blog/ai-coding-l1-l5
        
         | pzo wrote:
         | There is also Trae - vscode fork from bytedance
        
         | insane_dreamer wrote:
         | JetBrains Junie
        
       | jaggs wrote:
       | Really interesting from a 'in a bubble' point of view. I've been
       | using Void for the past few weeks as a replacement for Bolt,
       | Lovable, Tempo and the rest. Which is nothing like the use cases
       | mentioned in this thread. Just shows how we're each focused on
       | different parts of an environment? Of course I'm not a
       | programmer, I'm just a slash-and-hack vibe coder. :)
       | 
       | For the record, I really like Void. It's great at utilising local
       | models, which no-one else does. Although I'd love to know which
       | are the best Ollama local coding models. I've failed with a few
       | so the moment I'm sticking to Sonnet 3.7 and GPT 4.1. With 03 as
       | the 'big daddy'. :)
       | 
       | I'm also a fan because it's open source, which is really needed
       | in this space I feel. One question for the devs, what do you
       | think about this? https://blog.kilocode.ai/p/vs-code-forks-are-
       | facing-a-grim
        
       | orange_puff wrote:
       | As others have mentioned please add more docs / details to the
       | README
       | 
       | I want to mention my current frustration with cursor recently and
       | why I would love an OSS alternative that gives me control; I feel
       | cursor has dumped agentic capabilities everywhere, regardless of
       | whether the user wants it or not. When I use the Ask function as
       | opposed to Agent, it seems to still be functioning in an agentic
       | loop. It takes longer to have basic conversations about high
       | level ideas and really kills my experience.
       | 
       | I hope void doesn't become an agent dumping ground where this
       | behavior is thrust upon the user as much as possible
       | 
       | Not to say I dislike agent mode, but I like to choose when I use
       | it.
        
       | Singletoned wrote:
       | I think it's really interesting that Void (and Zed) are both much
       | more tastefully designed than Cursor, Windsurf or VSCode (though
       | I wouldn't have expected VSCode to be well designed)
        
       | chathaway123 wrote:
       | Not sure if this feedback is useful but I personally tried Void
       | this morning for about 10 mins on a flutter project (after
       | connecting all the various extensions and keys, which was
       | completely painless).
       | 
       | However, I uninstalled due to the sounds it made! A constant
       | clicking for some (unannounced) background work is bizarre choice
       | for any serious development environment.
        
       | SamDc73 wrote:
       | Something I was thinking -- if Microsoft keeps locking things
       | down for forks (which they sorta are), I wonder if the Void devs
       | would ever pivot to forking other editors like Zed, or if they're
       | just gonna keep charging headfirst into the wave.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-09 23:01 UTC)