> When you use AI in web chat's (the chat interfaces like AI Studio, ChatGPT, Openrouter, instead of thru an IDE or agent framework) are almost always better at solving problems, and coming up with solutions compared to the agents like Cline, Trae, Copilot.. Not always, but usually.
I completely agree with this!
While I understand that it looks a little awkward to copy and paste your code out of your IDE and into a web chat interface, I generally get better results that way than with GitHub copilot or cursor.
100% opposite experience.
Whether agentic, not… it’s all about context.
Either agentic with access to your whole project, “lives” in GitHub, a fine tune, or RAG, or whatever… having access to all of the context drastically reduces hallucinations.
There is a big difference between “write x” and “write x for me in my style, with all y dependencies, and considering all z code that exists around it”.
I’m honestly not understand a defense of copy and paste AI coding… this is why agents are so massively popular right now.
Agreed that it’s all about context — but my experience is that pasting into web chat allows me to manage context much more than if I drop the whole project/whole filesystem into context. With the latter approach the results tend to be hit-and-miss as the model tries to guess what’s right. All about context!
I’m also surprised by this take. I found copy/paste between editor and external chats to be way less helpful.
That being said, I think everyone has probably different expectations and workflows. So if that’s what works for them, who am I to judge?
I also agree with this.
While the ai has less context, you have more context using the limited chat window. You know what you need from the ai.