[leerob]

(I work at Cursor)

1. Checkpoints/rollbacks are still a focus for us, albeit it's less used for those working with git. Could you share the bug you saw?

2. Autocomplete for prompts was something we were skeptical of as well, but found it really useful internally to save time completing filenames of open code files, or tabbing to automatically include a recently opened file into the context. Goal here is to save you keystrokes. It doesn't use an LLM to generate the autocomplete.

3. A lot of folks don't want to juggle three AI subscriptions for coding and have found the Cursor sub where they can use GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok models to be a nice balance. YMMV of course!

[visarga]

> (I work at Cursor)

I find the amount of credits included in the pro subscription per month totally insufficient. Maybe it lasts 1-2 weeks.

Today I got a message telling me I exhausted my subscription when the web dashboard was showing 450/500. Is there a team level constraint on top of individual ones?

[causal]

Addressing 2) first: That's good, I totally misunderstood then, and guess I'll need to try it to understand what's new since I thought that kind of tabbing had been there a while.

Back to 1): The type of bug I see most often is where conversation history seems incomplete, and I have trouble rolling back to or even finding a previous point that I am certain existed.

Git shares some features but I think Git was not made for the type of conversational rapid-prototyping LLMs enable. I don't want to be making commits every edit in some kind of parallel-git-state. Cursor's rollback and branching conversations make it easy to backup if a given chat goes down the wrong path. Reapply is tedious since it has to be done one edit at a time - would be nice if you could roll-forward.

I haven't put much thought into what else would be useful, but in general the most value I get from Cursor is simplifying the complex state of branching conversations.

[stagalooo]

FWIW, my workflow with git is to stage changes I want to keep after every prompt. Then I can discard changes in the working area after a bad prompt or stage individual changes before discarding from the working area. Works really nice for me.

[causal]

Yeah I've used staging/stashing similarly, but it feels like working around Cursor rather than with it

[coconut08]

i really tried to use cursor and really wanted to like it but i constantly ran into this problem where the agent wasnt able to see what was happening in the terminal.

[kaoD]

I've had this happen too in VSCode, but for some reason I've never seen it since the GPT-5 Codex release?

Are you perhaps on Windows+MinGW? That's the only weird thing in my setup (and it has caused problems in the past for me).

[xyos]

I did too and it was because powerlevel10k theme for zsh, if you customize your terminal as many people do, you will have a bad time

[__jl__]

Since we have cursor people joining, let me bring up my constant problems around applying code changes. For background, I mostly work with "chat":

1. The apply button does not appear. This used to be mostly a problem with Gemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-5 but now sometimes happens with all models. Very annoying because I have to apply manually

2. Cursor doesn't recognize which file to apply changes to and just uses the currently open file. Also very annoying and impossible to change the file to which I want to apply changes after they were applied to one file.

[taylorfinley]

For both of these scenarios, it seems to happen when the context limit is getting full and the context is summarized. I've found it usually works to respond with the right file, i.e. "great, let's apply those changes in @path/to/file", but it may also be a good time to return to an earlier conversation point by editing one of your previous messages. You might edit the message that got you the response with changes not linked to a specific file, including the file path in that prompt will usually get you back on track.

[catlover76]

> 2. Autocomplete for prompts was something we were skeptical of as well, but found it really useful internally to save time completing filenames of open code files, or tabbing to automatically include a recently opened file into the context. Goal here is to save you keystrokes. It doesn't use an LLM to generate the autocomplete.

Oh ok, thanks for clarifying. That indeed seems like would be helpful.

Should still be configurable to turn off though (like any auto-complete, right)