undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnsonha11mo ago0 comments

Claude Code is what it is because of Claude, TUI or not isn't really the point. What makes IDEs lose to TUIs is that the agentic models can really do more than coding and is evolving toward a hands-off kind of workflow. A clunky IDE is too much for that, but TUI is not the way either. When has TUI ever been mainstream?

Agentic tools of the future will be rich notebook/chat interface that's available in all form factors, which is to say, most likely web/cross platform apps.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

yencabulator11mo ago· 1 in thread

You can have an agent loop in your IDE, I don't see why anything makes "IDEs lose to TUIs" there.

If anything, TUIs are the awkward in-between of "human in the loop, but with poor tools" where one side is fully automatic, agents suggesting fixes on issue tracker, and the other is holding-AI's-hand where you review every step one at a time.

I hate trying to copy paste in/out of Claude Code's unnecessarily-cute boxed text input.

Zed's implementation of the agent feedback loop isn't yet as good as Claude Code, but there's nothing inherently IDE-related in the parts that are lacking.

https://zed.dev/docs/ai/agent-panel

nsonhaOP11mo ago

I use the TUI for a lot of agentic stuff that is not necessarily coding, from performing some cloud management commands or just dumb things like "where the hell did I alias vim to nvim?". For those things, having to reach out to the IDE is annoying.

And the way I see the future of coding is that should should be able to code from anywhere, mobile, web, your computer. You already have your code on the cloud (most of the time). Neither TUI or IDE works well currently for that.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse