←back to thread

The Zed Debugger Is Here

(zed.dev)
502 points SupremumLimit | 6 comments | 19 Jun 25 02:42 UTC | HN request time: 1.164s | source | bottom
Show context
mort96 ◴[19 Jun 25 08:23 UTC] No.44316578[source]▶
I was interested in Zed, but lost all interest when they started integrating "AI". I'm tired of "AI" everywhere.

I'll just stick with Neovim until something better comes around. Which probably won't happen until after the "AI" bubble bursts.

replies(12): >>44316614 #>>44316634 #>>44316729 #>>44316830 #>>44316947 #>>44317120 #>>44317364 #>>44318004 #>>44319158 #>>44320333 #>>44320677 #>>44321186 #
laserbeam ◴[19 Jun 25 09:14 UTC] No.44316830[source]▶
Zed was the first editor that tempted me into using AI features. It felt solid in general and AI feels mostly like autocomplete in other editors (in terms of how much it's in your face). There's definitely a place for AI models and agents in code editors, and Zed makes me feel like it's not built around them, which is great! Zed feel like "Come to us, we are making a good fast editor that also has AI." while competition feel like "Come to us, we want AI that has an editor".
replies(1): >>44317097 #
mort96 ◴[19 Jun 25 10:04 UTC] No.44317097[source]▶
I'm genuinely happy it works for you. I just don't want AI in my text editor, even if you're happy with it.
replies(2): >>44317761 #>>44317987 #
arandomusername ◴[19 Jun 25 12:24 UTC] No.44317987[source]▶
Then don't use it? It's completely optional and works perfectly fine without AI
replies(1): >>44318026 #
1. mort96 ◴[19 Jun 25 12:30 UTC] No.44318026[source]▶
Thanks for the tip, but I was already not using it
replies(1): >>44320856 #
2. karaterobot ◴[19 Jun 25 17:42 UTC] No.44320856[source]▶
It's an unexpected position to take, though. You said you had been interested in Zed until they integrated AI. The response was "the AI is completely optional", which I'd expect would make you more likely to use Zed, since it removes your objection. But it doesn't change your position at all, which makes me suspect it's not that you're worried the AI would interfere with your workflow, but that it's there at all. So, is your position that the very fact that Zed allowed AI to touch it has infected it in some way?
replies(1): >>44321000 #
3. mort96 ◴[19 Jun 25 18:03 UTC] No.44321000[source]▶
I'm not interested in using text editors with chat bot integration, hope this clarifies things
replies(2): >>44322037 #>>44322955 #
4. karaterobot ◴[19 Jun 25 20:02 UTC] No.44322037{3}[source]▶
Not at all!
5. evilduck ◴[19 Jun 25 22:06 UTC] No.44322955{3}[source]▶
So you're just here to be an AI curmudgeon with no valuable input to the debugger conversation topic whatsoever, with no experience with Zed and no intent to ever even try it? Thanks for all the relevant and useful hot takes I guess.
replies(1): >>44323674 #
6. mort96 ◴[20 Jun 25 00:08 UTC] No.44323674{4}[source]▶
The way I see it, I shared thoughts on Zed, as someone who was once really interested in Zed and once tried to switch to it, in a discussion about Zed. It's not about the Zed debugger, but it's not like this thread is lacking in discussion of the debugger.

Am I an AI curmudgeon? I wouldn't necessarily use that word, but it's not entirely inaccurate.