...I do not guarantee it is finished now or ever will be...
...it is safe to assume I'm open to talking about this and am willing to learn...
..this is version 1.0; 2026-03-20
..previous versions: none
Earlier this year, I was creating a bioinformatics program called "onionskin" for a month or so with ChatGPT. But development with the chatbot approach had clearly met its limit. The repo was getting too big. I had to begin setting rules for ChatGPT on all the tests it would need to run to ensure it was at least (1) giving me something that worked, and (2) returning the complete updated repo. But as the codebase became bigger and more complex, it began tripping up more and more. It was time to move on to bringing the AI into a local copy of the repo, not ping-ponging it back and forth in the cloud.
Problem: I had not really used agentic coding yet. Or I thought I had not. I messed around here and there in VSCode and on Github, but I was totally naive.
I asked my brother, "And btw dude -- how do you use Claude for its famous coding stuff? Like all I see are how people with no programming skills told Claude to go build them an App, and it comes back with that App."
 |
The same day I would go on to download all possible AI apps and extensions, and begin learning.
I later texted him, "Just spent a ton of time... but feel like I leveled up a bit. I now have Cursor, Codex, and Claude Code working. I also have the Claude Code extensions in VSCode and Cursor. I have the ChatGPT and Claude Desktop Apps, and the Claude Desktop App also has a GUI for Claude Code (and Claude Cowork)."
1. The number of tools can seem intimidating, complicated further by the number of ways to use them - but fear not: it turns out to be somewhat easy to get up and running.
I wrote, "All these tools are mind numbing to an extent because there is some redundancy and I am not sure what my tool stack should be yet."
I was beginning to use agentic AI, but still grounded in the "older" method of chatting with an AI chatbot.
I began asking questions like:
- Will I use Cursor or stick with VSCode?
- Claude Code or Codex?
- Claude Code in Terminal, in VSCode, or in the App?
- If I use Claude Code, do I need Cursor?
I was wondering exactly what Claude in Terminal offers that it does not in VSCode. Chats with Claude and ChatGPT insisted Terminal was better, but for my purposes, those differences were barely perceptible.
Over a short period of time, I found that some of the choices are relatively arbitrary: just pick some preferences, and stick with them for a while. Mix something new in from time to time to see if it sticks.
2. "coding is dead" but with some pushback
I wrote, "I can really see why there are constantly articles about how coding is dead. I do not feel afraid per se though -- b/c coding is dead, but creation is not and creativity and productivity are still needed."
That bears repeating. Coding is dead, but creation is not.
Coding might be dead in the old sense. But coding was only ever a means to an end. It was to create something. There still needs to be a visionary that can dictate the vision and interpret the results through that lens. And coding is not dead. It is just different now. Easier now. Python was easier to code in than some other languages because it was sort of like writing in English. Coding with AI is exactly like writing in English.
AI is a boon to people who are full of ideas, but are only alright at coding. For them, AI will be a means for testing out bigger ideas, and more ideas, faster. AI in both chatbot and agentic form is like having a team of teachers, and students, and workers, and so on. So it may ultimately be good for people that have many good ideas, who are able to dictate those ideas clearly, and evaluate their implementation effectively.
3. Having a coding background is still beneficial
After using some agentic coding, I wrote, "Having a coding background still seems like it is beneficial at this time with these tools."
I noticed that AI companies are moving towards completely abstracting away the coding aspect so anyone can create anything the same anyone can tell AI to make a picture and never need to know how the picture was made. If AI were perfect at interpreting human intentions and coding, then the code may never need to be seen by anyone. But we are not totally there yet, and working with these tools and the code they create still requires or benefits from prior experience in the old world. That is not to say that this old-world advantage will last forever, but it is still an advantage.
I talked to ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude about how to get up and running with agentic coding. All recommended "Cursor".
Yet, I was struggling to see why Cursor was considered definitely better than VSCode.
I quizzed Claude on it. Claude highlighted 4 main advantages of Cursor. I pointed out that two of them were certainly not unique to Cursor, please look online and come back. It came back chastising itself a little bit, and gave 4 more reasons why Cursor is better. I pushed back again. Then Claude admitted the gap between them is closing. Still, Claude insisted it still has some advantages because of something about how the AI is a fundamental part of its architecture, not just extensions. Nonetheless, I walked away thinking Cursor had the reputation it had because it was an early success with agentic AI, but that it being strictly advantageous was potentially becoming outdated. Having said that, I have minimal experience with Cursor and would be happy to learn I am wrong. I just need use cases that prove its superiority.
"""All experiences are extremely similar from a functional POV for a small python project. Honestly, VSCode with CoPilot seems to be analogous to the advantages Cursor offers. I believe the gap is very much shrinking, and will continue to do so.Cursor also integrates with the Codex and Claude Code extensions, and using them within Cursor is exactly the same as using them within VSCode. So it is irrelevant whether you use VSCode or Cursor when using those extensions. The difference is just the native chat interface and the Cursor AI integration with using the other models, BUT the CoPilot chat interface looks and feels almost exactly the same, and differences may not be noticed by many users (that is my assumption). Use either IDE - I don't think it will matter much, especially if you're using Codex and/or Claude Code extensions. I believe Cursor probably came out swinging last year with features VSCode did not have, but that gap has closed massively. I retain the right to be wrong here though!"""
End of the day conclusions:
At the end of the day - I'd say the simplest thing for me to do is just use VSCode and the extensions. Otherwise, I can continue exploring Cursor and the extensions there. I remain curious about any real advantages to Cursor over VSCode+CoPilot as well as to the Apps over the extensions.
Early testing and conclusions:
```- Spawn a subagent to explore this repo.- Explore this repo.- Are you able to take commands directly as well as spawn subagents for given commands?- Create test.py with the following code:def hello():print("hello world")hello()
- turn this repo into a real small Python project, and review test.py to suggest improvements- Did you review test.py to suggest improvements?- Can you make this script more robust and add logging?- Would it be worthwhile creating a toml file and subdirectory structure and contents typical of python programs for this project to make it production ready? If so, please implement.- Can you run those tests? And fix any bugs that are detected?- Add logging and make this more robust- Make it more robust, design tests for it- If any of the following are needed, please do them: add logging, make it more robust, design tests for it, add docstrings- Create utils.py with the following function:def multiply(a, b):
return a * b
- Incorporate the multiply function from utils.py inside hello, maintain robustness, update logging if needed, set utils.py appropriate subdirectory as needed- Refactor this project so that:- hello() is part of a class- logging is added- utils is properly integrated- code is production-quality- README.md is up to date.- All code has helpful docstrings.- There are ways for user to get help message(s) and usage information.Ignore tasks that are already done.- Can you plan one addition to this small python project?- Can you tell me more about spawning subagents? Can you give me a prompt that I could give you in the future that would be viable for spawning two subagents adding different things to this project? I would like to see how they work in parallel.- Spawn two subagents to work on this project in parallel.Subagent 1:Add an environment-variable feature to the hello project so users can set default values for name, times, and log level from the shell. Update the CLI integration, validation, and tests. Keep changes scoped to the application code and tests that cover this behavior.Subagent 2:Add developer-quality improvements to the project by creating a CONTRIBUTING.md file, expanding README.md with development and testing guidance, and adding a small smoke test that verifies the CLI entry point works as documented. Keep changes scoped to docs and non-overlapping tests.After both subagents finish, integrate their work, resolve any conflicts, run verification, and summarize what each subagent changed.```
No comments:
Post a Comment