Get the top HN stories in your inbox every day.
spullara
conradfr
Jetbrains seems a bit lost these days. Look at that very recent screw up [0].
I thought about moving after 10+ years when they abandoned the commit modal, and jacked up the plan prices, but I barely understand how to commit things in Vscode anyway. Let's see in 2026.
[0] https://blog.jetbrains.com/datagrip/2025/12/18/query-console...
_virtu
The commit workflow was what kept me locked in to the ecosystem for so long. LazyGit was so good that it convinced me I didn’t need JetBrains anymore. If you love the workflow with JB for commits check out LazyGit. It’s a TUI so you can use it in any editor without much friction.
KptMarchewa
I'm kinda reading this with disbelief. Are there people whose primary use case for IDE is... git gui?
notpushkin
Or if you prefer a GUI (still separate app, so works anywhere, too): https://git-cola.github.io/
gizzlon
Just found LazyGit as well. it's amazing!
Also like Sublime Merge, if you want a GUI (paid though)
nikanj
Fortunately JB broke that addiction for my by first moving the commit dialog behind an option, and then removing it completely. If I have to learn a new workfrow, I might as well learn a new tool
tracker1
I mostly rely on the CLI for my git operations anyway. It does make it hard to support others who are using the tools (VS/code/jetbrains, etc) though, since I don't really "get" the workflows in the GUI tools at all.
undefined
thiht
> I barely understand how to commit things in Vscode anyway
Yeah that’s on you not even trying. Source control panel, add files or chunks, write message, commit.
mzhaase
You can put it all on a hotkey.
sesm
Did they abandon the commit modal? In 2024 line it's disabled by default (in favor of tool window) but you can enable it back.
jghn
They have a plugin for the old behavior
krzyk
Doesn't Jetbrains MCP (it is built on n, you need just to enable it) provide tool for refactoring?
taytus
I've been a paying user for years. I don't see the point anymore since claude code.
giancarlostoro
I have been leaning towards Zed.
parpfish
Jetbrainz needs to give up on Junie and their in house ai and focus on integrating with the established tools. If they don’t, VS code will consume them.
atombender
They've already done that. After the Junie fiasco, they pivoted to "AI Assistant", where Junie is just another provider alongside Anthropic and OpenAI. In theory, you have Claude Code inside Jetbrains IDEs now.
What's incredible is just how bad it works. I nearly always work with projects that mount multiple folders, and the IDE's MCP doesn't support that. So it doesn't understand what folders are open and can't interact with them. Junie the same issue, and the AI Assistant appears to have inherited it. The issue has been open for ages and ignored by Jetbrains.
I also tried out their full line completion, and it's incomprehensibly bad, at least for Go, even with "cloud" completion enabled. I'm back to using Augment, which is Claude-based autocompletion.
mirzap
Yeah, it's quite odd that they can't get AI tools to work, especially considering so many OSS tools available that work surprisingly well (cline, opencode, etc.).
dvtkrlbs
They already kinda did. They brough ACP support which allows you to somewhat integrate Claude Code, Gemini CLI or OpenCode they also recently brought BYOK support so you can use an existing provider and don't pay extra subscription for it.
CuriouslyC
ACP seems super under the radar. It has some support, but it got merged into A2A, which I don't hear anyone talking about, so it seems like it's going to die on the vine.
octopoc
I really enjoy Junie, I find it working better out of the box than Claude code. I do wish they integrated their amazing refactoring tools into it though.
bikelang
Is there something with the Claude code plugin for JB IDEs you don’t like? Is there something the VSCode Claude Code plugin does better?
wiseowise
I can’t speak for Claude, but Gemini is laughably bad. Like, does someone who develop this shit ever tried to use it? Is it all crab hands that only use mouse? It’s a single line change to switch focus to THE ONLY INPUT on a tool window, but no, you have to use a shortcut to switch to Gemini window and then MOVE YOUR MOUSE across the screen to select input or press tab like 5 times. Embarrassment.
VSCode? Select AI view via shortcut or CMD + P and you’re done. That’s how you do it.
cedws
If not VSCode then Zed. It feels like Zed is what they wanted Fleet to be.
reactordev
When you become complacent and your ego isn’t checked, you think you have the hottest thing. Hubris is hard. They had a pretty big moat that they let vscode eat away at. I don’t think they saw any of this coming and are struggling to make sense of it.
dist-epoch
They are trying now to create an agent-first IDE. I think they are too big to move on this.
https://blog.jetbrains.com/fleet/2025/12/the-future-of-fleet...
reactordev
>Over time, we learned that having two general-purpose IDE families created confusion and diluted our focus.
And not the dozens of others you have? Do you not consider them also separate families?
Yeah, they completely didn’t see any of this coming.
edelhans
They just announced the end of their fleet editor
wiseowise
So many salty fools who bought into “professional|enterprise grade ide” cool aid. Glad to see upstarts eating their lunch, they’ve been complacent for far too long.
stusmall
I've been a massive JetBrains fanboy for a bit over a decade. I finally let my subscription lapse this month. It isn't so much about AI integrations but overall competitors have caught up. The rise of LSP and DAP did a lot to shrink their competitive advantage
jayd16
Where are you getting the concept of ego and hubris from? I don't really see much personification of JB's public facing identity.
wiseowise
They’ve also dropped a huge ball with resisting LSP for Kotlin, thinking that they could lock developers into their ecosystem. Well, now (hopefully) it is too late, karma is a b*tch.
eterm
I completely agree. Likewise I'm amazed Microsoft hasn't done it themselves for Roslyn and Copilot. Roslyn analyzers are so incredibly powerful, and it's being ignored.
An explainer for others:
Not only can analyzers act as basic linters, but transformations are built right in to them. Every time claude does search-and-replace to add a parameter I want to cry a little, this has been a solved science.
Agents + Roslyn would be productive like little else. Imagine an agent as an orchestrator but manipulation through commands to an API that maintains guard rails and compilability.
Claude is already capable of writing roslyn analyzers, and roslyn has an API for implementing code transformations ( so called "quick fixes" ), so they already are out there in library form.
It's hard to describe them to anyone who hasn't used a similarly powerful system, but essentially it enables transforms that go way beyond simple find/replace. You get accurate transformations that can be quite complex and deep reworks to the code itself.
A simple example would be transforming a foreach loop into a for loop, or transforming and optimizing linq statements.
And yet we find these tools unused with agentic find/replace doing the heavy lifting instead.
Whichever AI company solves LSP and compiler based deep refactoring will see their utility shoot through the roof for working with large codebases.
remus
In a similar vein, I really struggle to understand why copilot is so crap when writing SQL and I'm connected to the database. The database has so much context (schema names, column names, constraints etc.) yet copilot regularly hallucinates the most basic stuff like table and column names, which standard auto complete has managed fine for the last 20+ years.
csomar
No one is interested to solve hard problems. The broad industry got lucky with LLMs and everyone is now blindly burning capital at this. If you think they can't be that stupid remember the covid super hiring frenzy.
joseda-hg
I dunno, SQL Server Management Studio regularly drops the ball on autocomplete ever since I've started using it
It was one of the things that brought me to DataGrid in the first place
cog-flex
I hope your current boss appreciates who they have.
neutronicus
Same shit, but Microsoft and Visual Studio.
Like, the AI can't jump to definition! What are we fucking doing!?
xnorswap
Exactly!
This is why LSP support should be huge, and I'm surprised it's just a line-item in a changelog.
atmosx
Is Roslyn available only for .NET?
eterm
Yes it's the name of the .NET compiler API.
It was code-named to disambiguate it from the old compiler. But Roslyn is almost 15 years old now, so I can't call it new, but it's newer than the really legacy stuff.
It essentially lets you operate on the abstract snytax tree itself, so there is background compilation that powers inspection and transformation.
Instant renaming is an obvious benefit, but you can do more powerful transformations, such as removing redundant code or transforming one syntax style into another, e.g. tranforming from a Fluent API into a procedural one or vice-versa.
neonsunset
[dead]
WahyuS002
It really does feel like the Innovator's Dilemma playing out for JetBrains. They have the best semantic understanding of code (PSI) locked away in their proprietary engine, but they seem too attached to the traditional "human-driving-the-IDE" paradigm.
Tools like Claude Code (and Cursor) are treating the editor/CLI as a fluid canvas for the AI, whereas JetBrains treats AI as just a sidebar plugin. If they don't expose their internal refactoring tools to agents soon, the friction of switching to VS Code/CLI becomes negligible compared to the productivity gains of these agents.
undefined
kachapopopow
I am trying my damn hardest to drop jetbrains, the only thing they have a stronglehold over is their amazing rust analyzer in rustrover. And yah I agree that they are dropping the ball on providing actual intellisense to AI tools, like why not? It's probably less than 10 lines of code.
undefined
cherryteastain
What does rustrover do that rust-analyzer itself cannot?
bravit
Hi! I’m from the RustRover team. RustRover is a full-blown IDE, not just a code analysis engine like rust-analyzer.
In addition to Rust code analysis, RustRover provides many features, including code linting, code formatting, dependency management (Cargo.toml editing), UI debugging, support for web technologies and databases, and AI support (including an agentic approach with Junie).
Comparing code analysis capabilities themselves is quite difficult, because Rust is a very complex language, especially when it comes to implementing IDE-level support. Features such as macros make this even more challenging. RustRover and rust-analyzer use different approaches to solving these problems, and we also share some components. Of course, neither approach is perfect. Depending on the specific project, the developer experience may vary.
kachapopopow
rust analyzer fails 13 lines into my main.rs file because I use something rust analyzer just doesn't work with that well, also it's much faster
ch2026
They wanted to, but they’re still waiting for the IDE itself to simply load.
clintonb
You joke and folks downvote, but this is my biggest issue with WebStorm. I'm seriously considering switching for the first time in 16 years. Zed is quite snappy. The Claude Code integration in VS Code is brilliant. I've used the CLI in the JetBrains terminal. I had no idea I could revisit past conversations until I used the VS Code extension!
Dayshine
Zed is snappy in the same way that notepad ++ is snappy: If you don't support 10% of language features you can avoid the hard work. Unfortunately this means that non trivial projects have false positive errors everywhere.
CharlesW
It's strangely difficult to find official information about this, but here's what I've learned:
• Use `/plugin` to open Claude Code's plug-in manager
• In the Discover tab, enter `lsp` in the search box
• Use `spacebar` to enable the ones you want, then `i` to install
Hope that helps!
JamesSwift
Yeah, I posted here because I was completely blindsided when my claude asked if I wanted to install a go lsp. I didnt even know that was a thing. A little googling led to this changelog from 3 days ago, but I was surprised I hadnt seen any previous mentions of this online (from either creators, anthropic, or HN posts).
I am disabling it for now since my flow is fine at the moment, I'll let others validate the usefulness first.
bredren
I got an unexpected offer to install the LSP plugin for swift-lsp at 6:30pm pst on 12/19pm and again yesterday afternoon the text reads:
LSP Plugin Recommendation
LSP provides code intelligence like go-to-definition and error checking
Plugin: swift-lsp
Swift language server (SourceKit-LSP) for code intelligence Triggered by: •swift files
Would you like to install this LSP plugin? › 1. Yes, install swift-lsp 2. No, not now 3. Never for swift-lsp 4. Disable all LSP recommendations
ako
I had a conversation with Claude code 2 weeks ago where it mentioned early support for LSP had been added into Claude code. Have been working on a LSP for a custom language since then.
tomashubelbauer
I am on the latest version of Claude Code and nothing comes up when I follow this and search for "mcp". Looks like this feature is quite undercooked at the moment. I'm hoping for a more straightforward way to enable this and ensure the LSP is being used by Claude in the future.
anamexis
Perhaps because you are searching for "mcp" and not "lsp"?
tomashubelbauer
LOL yeah that would be a solid guess but I just sanity checked and I messed it up only in the comment, in Claude Code when I search for "lsp" I still get no matches.
Maxious
If you want to add custom lsps, they need to be wrapped in a Claude code plugin which is where the little bit of actual documentation can be found https://code.claude.com/docs/en/plugins-reference
bicx
Thanks! I saw typescript-lsp in the plugins list, but I wasn't sure if that was related.
undefined
undefined
xnorswap
That works, but even after installing the plugin, it doesn't seem to run the language server itself, so it doesn't seem to do anything in the terminal version of claude-code.
I'd be disappointed if this were a feature only for the vscode version.
kasey_junk
Have you figured out what triggers it?
CharlesW
No, and it looks like this functionality was released/announced prematurely:
https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/14803#issue...
https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/13952#issue...
https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/13952#issue...
JamesSwift
My permissions prompt isnt quite working right with it either. It pops up but isnt blocking, so claude continues editing and asking for other permissions which replaces this prompt. Then when you confirm those prompts, it shows the LSP prompt again. Definitely needs polish (and explanations on how it even benefits the agent)
brianyu8
I am super bullish on claude code / codex cli + LSP and other deterministic codemod and code intelligence tools.
I was playing around with codex this weekend and honestly having a great time (my opinion of it has 180'd since gpt-5.2(-codex) came out) but I was getting annoyed at it because it kept missing references when I asked it to rename or move symbols. So I built a skill that teaches it to use rope for mechanical python codebase refactors: https://github.com/brian-yu/python-rope-refactor
Been pretty happy with it so far!
lionkor
OpenAI engineer fails to rename references because his F2 key has been replaced with the Copilot button?
No LSP support is wild.
shimman
This is something I notice often when using these tools (if this is what you are referring too). Like they will grep entire code bases to search for a word rather than search by symbol. I suppose they don't care to fix these types of things as it all adds up to paid tokens in the end.
We have 50 years worth of progress on top of grep and grep is one of the worse ways to refactor a system.
Nice to see LLM companies are ignoring these teachings and speed running into disaster.
nvarsj
Only if they are not told how to search the codebase efficiently. All you need is an MCP server for code search. There's even LSP backed MCP servers now.
qiine
> grep is one of the worse ways to refactor Hum? care to explain this?
shepherdjerred
Are you having a positive experience with Codex compared to Claude Code? Codex in my brief experience was... not good w/ 5.1
cube2222
Just to provide another datapoint - tried codex September / October after seeing the glowing reviews here, and it was, all in all, a huge letdown.
It seems to be very efficient context-wise, but at the same time made precise context-management much harder.
Opus 4.5 is quite a magnificent improvement over Sonnet 4.5, in CC, though.
Re tfa - I accidentally discovered the new lsp support 2 days ago on a side project in rust, and it’s working very well.
linsomniac
I was luke-warm about codex when I tried it 2-3 months ago, but just recently tried it again last week, running it against claude code, both of them running against the same todo list to build a docusign-like web service. I was using loops of "Look at the todo list and implement the next set of tasks" for the prompt (my prompt was ~3 sentences, but basically saying that):
- Codex required around 30 passes on that loop, Claude did it in ~5-7.
- I thought Codex's was "prettier", but both were functional.
- I dug into Claude's result in more depth, and had to fix ~5-10 things.
- Codex I didn't dig into testing quite as deeply, but it seemed to need less fixing. Still not sure if that is because of a more superficial view.
- Still a work in progress, have not completed a full document signing workflow in either.fluidcruft
Similar experience and timeline with codex, but tried it last week and it's gotten much better in the interim. Codex with 5.2 does a good job at catching (numerical) bugs that Opus misses. I've been comparing them and there's not a clear winner, GPT 5.2 misses things Opus finds and vice versa. But claude-code is still a much better experience and continues to just keep getting better but codex is following, just a few months behind.
allisdust
Another anecdote/datapoint. Same experience. It seem to mask a lot of bad model issues by not talking much and overthinking stuff. The experience turns sour the more one works with it.
And yes +1 for opus. Anthropic delivered a winner after fucking up the previous opus 4.1 release.
HarHarVeryFunny
What are some of the use cases for Claude Code + LSP ? What does LSP support let you do, or do better, that Claude Code couldn't do by itself ?
kohlerm
I checked the codex source code a few months ago and the implementation was very basic compared to opencode
theshrike79
It goes like this:
Codex is an outsourcing company, you give specs, they give you results. No communication in between. It's very good at larger analysis tasks (code coverage, health etc). Whatever it does, it does it sloooowwwllyyy.
Claude is like a pair programmer, you can follow what it's doing, interrupt and redirect it if it starts going off track. It's very much geared towards "get it done" rather than maximum code quality.
aschobel
I’m basically only using the Codex CLI now. I switched around the GPT-5 timeframe because it was reliably solving some gnarly OpenTelemetry problems that Claude Code kept getting stuck on.
They feel like different coworker archetypes. Codex often does better end-to-end (plan + code in one pass). Claude Code can be less consistent on the planning step, but once you give it a solid plan it’s stellar at implementation.
I probably do better with Codex mostly due to familiarity; I’ve learned how it “thinks” and how to prompt it effectively. Opus 4.5 felt awkward for me for the same reason: I’m used to the GPT-5.x / Codex interaction style. Co-workers are the inverse, they adore Opus 4.5 and feel Codex is weird.
__mharrison__
I've gone it works wonderful for 5.2. I think chatgpt plus is at the top of the weekly AI rolling wars. Most bang for the buck.
frays
Interesting to see that you work at OpenAI but had to build a skill like this yourself.
Surprised that you don't have internal tools or skills that could do this already!
Shows how much more work there is still to be done in this space.
voiper1
My theory is that even if the models are frozen here, we'll still spend a decade building out all the tooling, connections, skills, etc and getting it into each industry. There's so much _around_ the models that we're still working on too.
nonethewiser
Agree completely. It's already been like this for 1-2 years even. Things are finally starting to get baked in but its still early. For example, AI summaries of product reviews, gemini youtube video summaries, etc..
Its hard to quantify what sort of value those examples generate (youtube and amazon were already massively popular). Personally I find it very useful, but it's still hard to quantify. It's not exactly automating a whole class of jobs, although there are several youtube transcription services that this may make obsoete.
NitpickLawyer
> Shows how much more work there is still to be done in this space.
This is why I roll my eyes every time I read doomer content that mentions an AI bubble followed by an AI winter. Even if (and objectively there's 0 chance of this happening anytime soon) everyone stops developing models tomorrow, we'll still have 5+ years of finding out how to extract every bit of value from the current models.
agumonkey
One thing though, if the slowdown is too abrupt, it might forbid openai, anthropic etc to keep financially running datacenters for us to use.
imiric
The idea that this technology isn't useful is as ignorant as thinking that there is no "AI" bubble.
Of course there is a bubble. We can see it whenever these companies tell us this tech is going to cure diseases, end world hunger, and bring global prosperity; whenever they tell us it's "thinking", can "learn skills", or is "intelligent", for that matter. Companies will absolutely devalue and the market will crash when the public stops buying the snake oil they're being sold.
But at the same time, a probabilistic pattern recognition and generation model can indeed be very useful in many industries. Many of our problems can be approached by framing them in terms of statistics, and throwing data and compute at them.
So now that we've established that, and we're reaching diminishing returns of scaling up, the only logical path forward is to do some classical engineering work, which has been neglected for the past 5+ years. This is why we're seeing the bulk of gains from things like MCP and, now, "agents".
jameslk
Useful technology can still create a bubble. The internet is useful but the dotcom bubble still occurred. There’s expectations around how much the invested capital will see a return and growing opportunity cost if it doesn’t, and that’s what creates concerns about a bubble. If a bubble bursts, the capital will go elsewhere, and then you’ll have an “AI winter” once again
shermantanktop
Cobbler’s children…
Aiisnotabubble
[dead]
rglynn
I've had a number of occasions where claude (et al.) have incorrectly carried out a task involving existing code (e.g. create a widget for foo, following bar's example). In these cases the way I would have done it would be to copy said existing code and then modify the copied code. I've always wondered if they should just be using copy tool (even just using xclip) instead of using context.
dvtkrlbs
What boggles my mind is. I've been using OpenCode [1] which had this future for at least 6 months. I sometimes baffled by the slow progress of closed source software. Also highly recommend OpenCode you can also use it with your Claude subscription or Copilot one.
[1]: https://opencode.ai/
jwr
I must be doing something wrong, because I can't get OpenCode to actually do anything useful, and not for lack of trying. Claude code gets me great results instantly, opencode (if I can't make it talk to a model, which isn't easy for Gemini) gets me… something, but it's nowhere near as useful as claude code. I don't know why there is so much difference, because theoretically there shouldn't be. Is it the prompt that Anthropic has been polishing in Claude code for so long?
richardgill88
> Is it the prompt that Anthropic has been polishing in Claude code for so long?
I think so.
The opencode TUI is very good, but whenever I try it again the results are subjectively worse than Claude Code. They have the disadvantage of supporting many more models in terms refining prompts / tool usage.
The Claude Code secret sauce seems to be running evals on real world performance and then tweaking prompts and the models themselves to make it work better.
ako
There’s a ton of difference provided on top of the LLMs, especially the tools that allow LLMs to engineer their own context, validate generated code, test generate code, research code bases, planners, memory, skills, etc. The difference is night and day: like a brain in a closed jar versus a brain in a mobile human with eyes, ears, mouth and hands.
dvtkrlbs
I only played with Claude Code briefly but my experience with OpenCode was amazing. My experience it works the best with Claude especially Sonnet models (I use it with Claude Sonnet 4.5 with my Copilot subscription).
linkage
You can move quite fast when you don't have to spend half a week persuading 7 stakeholders that something is worth doing, then spend a week arguing about sprint capacity and roadmap disruptions.
khimaros
preferring open source and provider agnostic tools, i really want to like OpenCode. i used it exclusively for months, but sadly it has major usability issues which switching to Claude Code solved:
- accidental approvals when trying to queue a prompt because of the unexpected popovers - severe performance issues when pending approval (using 100% of all cores) - tool call failures
having used Crush, OpenCode, aider, mistral-vibe, Gemini CLI (and the Qwen fork), and Claude Code, the clear winner is CC. Gemini/Qwen come in second but they do lose input when you decline a requested permission on a tool call.
that said, CC also has its issues, like the flickering problem that happens in some terminals while scrolling executed command output.
resize2996
tbf, OpenCode's development cycle seems pretty fast. If someone announced AGI in the morning, I'd bet they have it integrated by EOD.
I also use OpenCode extensively, but bounce around to test out the other ones.
troyvit
I just started playing with OpenCode over the weekend after working with aider and aider-ce, and I like a lot of things about it, though I miss some aider features. What other code helpers have you worked with?
resize2996
The big players (Gemini, Claude Code, Codex) and then aider and opencode for open source.
I keep my setup modular/composable so I can swap pieces and keep it usable by anyone (agent, human, time traveler) depending on what the task needs. In the aughts I standardized on "keep worklogs and notes on tools and refine them into runbooks" so that has translated pretty well to agentic skills/tools. (a man page is a perfectly cromulent skill, btw.)
SamDc73
I do like OpenCode, but I get small bugs here and there like flickering, freezing and sometimes just crash all together.
But their configuration setup is the easiest and best out of all the other CLI tools
mgraczyk
One answer to questions like this is that Claude Code has orders of magnitude more paying users, so it's more important to get things right and ship carefully
kbar13
i'm not sure i agree with the assessment that claude code has been moving slowly... but it is cool that opencode has had this for a while. will def check it out
ed_blackburn
I literally said this three days ago: https://hachyderm.io/@ed_blackburn/115747527216812176
But in all seriousness, LLMs have their strengths but we’re all wasting tokens and burning the planet unnecessarily getting LLMs to work so inefficiently. Use the best tool for the job; make the tools easier to use by LLMs. This mantra is applicable generally. Not just for coding.
grimgrin
it's likely been on their mind for _a while_
those wanting lsp support in the loop have been using things such as: https://github.com/oraios/serena
dcreater
I hope in a couple of years the industry would have outgrown this adolescene and we'll all collectively look back at this horribly inefficient and poorly engineered tooling with disdain. We need to as these things are literally causing harm to the planet (energy, water, raw materials, geopolitics)
anthonypasq
I find it so weird that people are so bullish on the CLI form factor when they are literally just adding functionality that IDE based agents get for free. Stuff like improved diff tools and LSP support in the terminal instead of idk... just using a GUI/IDE?
Pretty sure Cursor has had this for a while.
zingar
IDEs have LSP support because they have a plugin that connects to an LSP server. The plugin is a very small piece of code compared to the language server. Creating a new client is not reinventing the wheel. In fact the entire philosophy of LSP is: one server to many different clients.
CLIs can also have a small piece of code that connects to an LSP server. I don’t see why IDEs should be the sole beneficiary of LSP just because they were the first clients imagined by the LSP creators.
blitz_skull
I have not yet had an IDE-based agent give anything close to the CLI Claude Code experience.
So until it manages to do that, I’ll keep being bullish on what works.
dustypotato
Google Antigravity is pretty much close to Claude Code imo
Jgrubb
Including the Claude Code v2 experience in VSCode.
Thank you, whoever added the setting to revert back to the terminal experience.
anthonypasq
nothing about that is because its a cli app
ramoz
I just saw a video of non-technical person describing how they use claude code to automate various workflows. They actually tried vscode and then the desktop gui.
Yet they preferred the CLI because it felt "more natural"
With agents, and Claude Code, we are *orchestrating* ... this is an unresolved UI/UX in industry. The same reasons `kubectl` didn't evolve to GUI probably apply here.
It's less about the codebase, more about the ability to conduct anything on the computer - you are closest to that in the terminal. https://backnotprop.com/blog/its-on-your-computer/
scottyah
There are plenty of GUIs for managing kubernetes, from k9s to redhat's Openshift gui, rancher, Lens, etc
ramoz
big reach
JamesSwift
Curious if you have a link to that video. Im trying to bridge the gap of claude code to non technical users and am trying to consume all prior art.
ramoz
This is also what I’ve been doing. I can’t find the exact video but this is another good example: https://www.tiktok.com/@thinkwithv/video/7580186972208024863
The comments are usually insightful. Even in that video the terminal ui is brought up and she mentions her preference.
nextaccountic
What IDE agent gets access to LSP?
I use Zed and unless there is some MCP server that provides the same thing as the LSP server, the Zed agent won't have access, even though it's in an IDE that supposedly has this information
joshuacc
Cursor, Copilot, Roo Code, Cline, among others.
nextaccountic
Hi, I just looked up and two weeks ago someone made this suggestion in Cursor forum
https://forum.cursor.com/t/support-of-lsp-language-server-pr...
> Feature request for product/service
>
> Cursor IDE
>
> Describe the request
>
> It would be a huge step up if agent could interact with LSP (Language Server Protocol).
>
> It would offer :
>
> renaming all instances of a symbol over all files in one action
> quick navigation through code : fast find of all references to a property or method
> organize imports, format code, etc…
And last Friday a Cursor engineer replied "Thanks for the idea!"
So how does the AI agent in Cursor currently have access to LSP?
(I am most interested in having the agent use LSP for type checking, documentation of a method call, etc. rather than running slower commands)
(note, there is an open PR for Zed to pull LSP diagnostics into an AI agent thread https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/pull/42270 but it would be better if agents could make arbitrary LSP queries or something like that)
anthonypasq
cursor
bakies
Well my editor is in the terminal, so is my chatbot. I dont really want to change to an IDE to use a desktop app and a chatbot that both have half-baked UIs trying to complement each other.
BeetleB
For many of us, the plus of the CLI form factor is it doesn't tie us to a particular IDE.
vorticalbox
My favourite agent crush[0] has lsp support for a while.
I’ve not noticed the agent deciding to use it all that much.
ramoz
I haven't come across a case where it has used the LSP yet.
Opus 4.5 is fairly consistent in running QA at proper times. Lint checks and all are already incorporated into a standard & native processes outside of IDE. I think lookup can be useful when definitions are hidden deep in hard to reach places on my disk... hasn't been a problem though the agent usually finds what it needs.
Anyway, here is what it stated it could do:
> Do you have access to an lsp tool?
Yes, I have an LSP tool with these operations:
- goToDefinition - Find where a symbol is defined
- findReferences - Find all references to a symbol
- hover - Get documentation/type info for a symbol
- documentSymbol - Get all symbols in a file
- workspaceSymbol - Search for symbols across the workspace
- goToImplementation - Find implementations of an interface/abstract method
- prepareCallHierarchy - Get call hierarchy item at a position
- incomingCalls - Find what calls a function
- outgoingCalls - Find what a function callsvexna
Just a heads up that this is completely broken as of 2.0.76.
Dug through their obfuscated JS and it looks like they forgot to re-add a function call in the LSP manager initialize function that actually adds/indexes the lsp registered from plugins.
paxys
So they moved coding AIs from the IDE into a standalone CLI and now are building an IDE around the CLI?
zby
LSPs should expose their api through shell commands - then integrating it with any LLM would be trivial. And it would also be very useful for humans.
anamexis
You could use a CLI frontend for LSP, e.g. https://github.com/valentjn/lsp-cli
But why would that be better than LLMs using the LSP with a dedicated tool rather than a shell command tool?
wild_egg
CLIs don't use context space when unused. I find them almost universally preferable just because of that.
Models get stupid after the first 80-100k tokens are used so keeping bloated tools out of the window unless completely necessary is a pretty hard requirement for effective AI use IMO.
anamexis
Well you need to use context space somehow, to tell Claude that the LSP CLI exists and how to use it.
hexsprite
The typescript-lsp (and others?) is missing a critical part of LSPs whcih is the diagnostics for real-time errors and warnings. So you still need to run a linter, tsc, etc. to generate those sadly.
Get the top HN stories in your inbox every day.
I really can't understand why JetBrains hasn't integrated its refactoring tools into the AI system. Really missed the boat on making their platform transformational for AI coding. Imagine how much smaller the context would be for a tool that renames a function than editing hundreds of files. This LSP support is a good start but without the mutation functions it is still pretty lackluster. Plus LSPs aren't as good as JetBrains generally.