upvote

points

by michaelchisari16 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby radarsat116 hours ago|
next
[-]
> It's wildly better at tight and limited scope than large scale changes but even then I would rather code it myself.

One thing I would like to see is the use of LLMs for smarter semi-manual editing.

While programming I often need to make very similar changes in several places. If the instances are similar enough I can get away with recording a one-off keyboard macro to repeat, but if there are differences that are too difficult to handle this way I end up needing to do a lot of manual editing.

It would be nice to see LLMs tightly integrated into the editor so I can do a simple "place the cursor at things like this" based on an example or two. I'm sure more ideas for using LLMs more quickly perform semantic changes you intended are possible, instead of just prompting for a big diff. I feel there's a lot more innovation possible in this direction, where you're still "coding it yourself" but just faster.

reply
upvoteby strange_quark15 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I've had a similar thought. A super refactor feature would be amazing, but wouldn't fit into the current zeitgeist of agent everything. Hopefully as the hype starts to die down and prices go up, we'll get some of these smaller, more targeted features.
reply
upvoteby empthought14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You don't need a special feature for this. Just tell the coding assistant what to do.
reply
upvoteby soco6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Then watch it f'up half your codebase because it thinks it's slightly related to your examples. The alternative, giving it 10 examples, is actually more work.
reply
upvoteby empthought14 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
You should try using the existing agents for your semi-manual editing. You don't need editor support. The coding agent can find "things like this" faster than you can. Just tell it what to look for and how to change it.

What I did was make one commit by hand (involving multiple files), and then told Codex (last year's Codex!) to make the equivalent changes to other instances in the code base.

reply
upvoteby xixixao8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Wait, have you been using Cursor? This is exaclty what it does fairly well.
reply
upvoteby skydhash15 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> I come in knowing what I need to build and at least one idea or more of how it should be done. I present the problem, constraints, potential solutions, and ask for criticisms and alternatives

Never understood that argument. Because there’s two steps in design. Finding a good solution (discussing prior art, tradeoffs,…) and then nailing the technical side of that solution (data structures, formula,…). Is it the former, the latter or both?

reply