(评论)
(comments)

原始链接: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43658923

Hacker News 上的一个讨论串围绕着 Cursor AI 编码工具展开,起因是一篇关于编写 Cursor 规则的文章。一位资深开发者表达了对 Cursor 的不满,认为它令人筋疲力尽,需要不断进行代码审查。其他用户分享了他们的策略,其中一人建议采用两步法:先用 Grok 基于整个代码库的上下文生成实现方案,然后用 Cursor 配合 Claude 3.7 执行代码更改。他们称赞 Grok 能够理解整个上下文并生成高质量的方案。另一位用户则更倾向于使用 Gemini Pro。讨论还涉及到 AI 编码规则的标准化潜力,类似于编码规范,以确保组织内部的代码一致性。总的来说,这个讨论串提供了关于有效利用 Cursor 等 AI 工具进行软件开发的各种观点和实用技巧。


原文
Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Writing Cursor rules with a Cursor rule (adithyan.io)
33 points by adithyan_win 3 hours ago | hide | past | favorite | 9 comments










I have found Cursor to be frustrating and exhausting to work with, even with my rules file. When it works, it’s like magic. But most of the time, it feels like working with a Jr. dev who has a bit of a concussion. Code review is wearying work, and using Cursor means you’re doing a lot of code review. I have never once gotten into a flow state with it.

That was a long preamble to this question: any senior devs out there (20+ years) who enjoy using Cursor? What’s the trick?



The trick I’ve been using is to copy the entire codebase into a text prompt with Repo Prompt and feed that into Grok with a specific request on what feature / change I want.

Then paste that output into Cursor with Claude 3.7 and have it make the actual code changes and ask it to build/fix errors along the way with yolo mode enabled.

The 2-step process is a lot better since Grok can refer to the entire context of your codebase in one shot and come up with a high quality implementation plan, which is then handed off to Cursor to autonomously make the code changes.



Or Gemini Pro


I don’t know if I’m doing something wrong, but Gemini 2.5 pro was substantially worse coding quality than Grok. Which is surprising since I’m working on a Golang codebase which I had assumed Gemini would excel at given that it’s made by Google


Grok is quickly becoming my favorite model just because it’s so verbose, but at the same time low on BS.


Yes, Grok has become my go to model for general research and targeted coding tasks. Feels like its getting better over time vs ChatGPT which seemed to deteriorate over time.

Claude 3.7 is excellent, and better at coding but I appreciate the context size of Grok and feel like I get better bang for my buck for general purpose research too.



How long until such "rules" also become standardized (like we saw with MCP)? It feels redundant to have rules.cursorrules and rules.aiderrules where the rules content is the same. I predict companies will not only publish coding guidelines for their programmers, they'll publish these tiny coding rules for LLMs used in the company as well, so all code follows the same standards/idioms.


I’ve been using more and more AI tools in my development and getting a lot of mileage. Cursor is the latest one I’ve adopted and it’s impressive even without rules.

I’ll give this a try soon. Thanks for sharing!



Does anyone have a variant on this meta rule file that isn't React specific?






Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact



Search:
联系我们 contact @ memedata.com