Crush (compared to OpenCode):
- Pro: Sexy UI with separate diff window and good information context
- Con: No SSO with Antropic. You need to generate an API key
- Con: No login with Github Copilot
- Con: Rly bad planning capabilities as agend. Acts awskwardly, executes single commands instead of batch commands.
- Con: Thus it is really slow.
- Con: Uses much more tokens for operations than OpenCode
Currently I would definately go with sst/opencode. Seems like crush is much more a beta.
I don't get why terminal agents are so popular of late. Having spent more than a decade in terminal based development (vi*), and now fully moved over to a real IDE (vs code), it seems bonkers to me. The IDE is so much more... integrated
The big question - which one of these new agents can consume local models to a reasonable degree? I would like to ditch the dependency on external APIs - willing to trade some performance in lieu.
Woah I love the UI. Compared to the other coding agents I've used (eg. Claude Code, aider, opencode) this feels like the most enjoyable to use so far..
Anyone try switching LLM providers with it yet? That's something I've noticed to be a bit buggy with other coding agents
sucks that i can't use any of these because claude code has me in golden handcuffs. I don't care about the cli but for a hobbyist i can't afford to call llm apis directly.
Another one, but indeed very nice looking. Will definitely be testing it.
What I miss from all of these (EDIT: I see opencode has this for github) is the lack of being able to authenticate with the monthly paid services; github copilot, claude code, openai codex, cursor etc etc
That would be the best addition; I have these subscriptions and might not like their interfaces, so it would be nice to be able to switch.
I don't think most of these allow other tools to "use" the monthly subscription. Because of that you need an API key and have to pay per tokens. Even Claude code for a while did not use your Claude subscription.
One nice thing about this is that it's early days for this, and the code is really clear and schematic, so if you ever wanted a blueprint for how to lay out an agent with tool calls and sessions and automatic summarization and persistence, save this commit link.
I find it strange how most of these terminal-based AI coding agents have ended up with these attempts at making text UIs flashy. Tons of whitespace, line art, widgets, ascii art and gradients, and now apparently animations. And then what you don't get is the full suite of expected keybindings, tab completion, consistent scrollback, or even flicker-free text rendering. (At least this one seems to not be written with node.js, so I guess there's some chance that the terminal output is optimized to minimize large redraws?).
So they just don't tend to work at all like you'd expect a REPL or a CLI to work, despite having exactly the same interaction model of executing command prompts. But they also don't feel at all like fullscreen Unix TUIs normally would, whether we're talking editors or reader programs (mail readers, news readers, browsers).
Is this just all the new entrants copying Claude Code, or did this trend get started even earlier than that? (This is one of the reasons Aider is still my go-to; it looks and feels the way a REPL is supposed to.)
I have a sneaking suspicion claude code is tui just because that’s more convenient for running on ephemeral vms (no need to load a desktop os, instant ssh compatibility) and that they didn’t realize everyone would be raw dogging —dangerously-no-permissions on their laptop’s bare metal OS
One thing I'm curious about: Assuming you're using the same underlying models, and putting obvious pricing differences aside: What is the functional difference between e.g. Charm and Claude Code? And Cursor, putting aside the obvious advantages running in a GUI brings and that integration.
Is there secret sauce that would make one better than the other? Available tools? The internal prompting and context engineering that the tool does for you? Again, assuming the model is the same, how similar should one expect the output from one to another be?
58 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 88.6 ms ] threadI just can’t get an easy overview of how each tool works and is different
[1]: https://github.com/sst/opencode
Currently I would definately go with sst/opencode. Seems like crush is much more a beta.
What I miss from all of these (EDIT: I see opencode has this for github) is the lack of being able to authenticate with the monthly paid services; github copilot, claude code, openai codex, cursor etc etc
That would be the best addition; I have these subscriptions and might not like their interfaces, so it would be nice to be able to switch.
So they just don't tend to work at all like you'd expect a REPL or a CLI to work, despite having exactly the same interaction model of executing command prompts. But they also don't feel at all like fullscreen Unix TUIs normally would, whether we're talking editors or reader programs (mail readers, news readers, browsers).
Is this just all the new entrants copying Claude Code, or did this trend get started even earlier than that? (This is one of the reasons Aider is still my go-to; it looks and feels the way a REPL is supposed to.)
I'm guessing building this is what Charm raised the funds for.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/glamorou...
Is there secret sauce that would make one better than the other? Available tools? The internal prompting and context engineering that the tool does for you? Again, assuming the model is the same, how similar should one expect the output from one to another be?