←back to thread

OpenAI Codex CLI: Lightweight coding agent that runs in your terminal

(github.com)
514 points mfiguiere | 1 comments | 16 Apr 25 17:24 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
danenania ◴[16 Apr 25 19:24 UTC] No.43709339[source]▶
Cool to see more interesting terminal based options! Looking forward to trying this out.

I've been working on something related—Plandex[1], an open source AI coding agent that is particularly focused on large projects and complex tasks.

I launched the v2 a few weeks ago and it is now running well. In terms of how to place it in the landscape, it’s more agentic than aider, more configurable and tightly controlled than Devin, and more provider-agnostic/multi-provider/open source than Claude Code or this new competitor from OpenAI.

I’m still working on getting the very latest models integrated. Gemini Pro 2.5 and these new OpenAI models will be integrated into the defaults by the end of the week I hope. Current default model pack is a mix of Sonnet 3.7, o3-mini with various levels of reasoning effort, and Gemini 1.5 Pro for large context planning. Currently by default, it supports 2M tokens of context directly and can index and work with massive projects of 20M tokens and beyond.

Very interested to hear HN’s thoughts and feedback if anyone wants to try it. I'd also welcome honest comparisons to alternatives, including Codex CLI. I’m planning a Show HN within the next few days.

1 - https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex

replies(5): >>43709479 #>>43709833 #>>43710264 #>>43710399 #>>43710602 #
georgewsinger ◴[16 Apr 25 20:12 UTC] No.43709833[source]▶
Insane that people would downvote a totally reasonable comment offering a competing alternative. HN is supposed to be a community of tech builders.
replies(1): >>43709911 #
throwaway314155 ◴[16 Apr 25 20:19 UTC] No.43709911[source]▶
I would wager a sizeable chunk of the people here have no idea about the nature of this site's ownership/origin. This crowd finds this sort of thing to be a sort of astro-turfing - not communal.

edit: And I can't say I disagree.

replies(1): >>43710861 #
groby_b ◴[16 Apr 25 21:59 UTC] No.43710861[source]▶
It'a github link for an MIT-licensed project...

If the community considers that astroturfing, we have completely lost the plot what building is.

replies(1): >>43710974 #
1. throwaway314155 ◴[16 Apr 25 22:17 UTC] No.43710974{3}[source]▶
The MIT license is basically the license of choice for growth hacking these days. Many VC backed companies follow this strategy - it serves to grow your userbase, a free-tier for developers using your ecosystem and last but not least, a chance for volunteers to do free work for you.

This is perhaps too cynical for this specific instance, but it's not overly cynical more broadly. Considering users of the site have to evaluate many of these offerings frequently, I don't blame them for having a negative gut reaction.