| Excited to see this on HN front page! Unlike others, I didn't mind the CC + 30 day trial. 30 days actually feels generously long as I don't see many other projects offering that. I think it's ultimately right move for this project to live long. After trying it for a bit on a very very large codebase(more than the context window supported, albeit I haven't done anything superr insightful yet), the code suggestion does seem better + faster than Copilot. However, I'm not sure if the "completion" UX is the best way to enhance human programmers with AI. And within the completion realm, leaning on the speed, ie. inferencing on every keystroke, is not that attractive for myself. What attracted me is really the context length. So I'd provide much more examples of cross context code suggestion, similar to the 3js demo from gemini 1.5. Back to the completion UX thing. I feel like often times seeing the completion pop up is a double edged sword. The moment it pops up, it distracts me from "outputting mode" into "evaluation mode" to see if the result is correct. If it's right, then great, you've saved me time. But for the times where it's wrong(which... was quite a bit for copilot), it's actually a net negative as I now have to re-enter the "outputting mode" and force myself to ignore the new output that will get generated as the new keystroke comes out. With Supermaven, this "switch" happens 10x more than copilot because of the speed as well. Cursor/Zed with their CMD K code insert is obviously the other "big" ai coding UX.(along with chat) Personally I like them quite a bit and wish they had the speed and context window that supermaven is currently offering. But tbh, all of the UX's feel a little off at the moment... Just my 2c' as an amateur programmer! |