I'd wish a better model or system would go live for the inline suggestions. The Zed ones are so trash compared to Cursor's it is just laughable.
An example is that when I have a module like Namespace::SuperAbcModule in a file at namespace/super_abc_module.rb and I rename the file to namespace/super_module.rb, Cursor will immediately suggest to change the module name to `Namespace::SuperModule`, Zed won't.
Also Cursor will suggest updates to lines throughout a file whereas Zed sometimes doesn't even look ahead 1-2 lines.
Having Claude Code and Codex built into the sidebar is hardly better than having them running in a terminal. I wish they'd invested all this time and effort improving the inline suggestions.
While your example is not AI related (should be handled by the LSP integration with "Rename Symbol") I agree that Zed's Next Edit Prediction model is *extremely* subpar. Imho they should either scrap it and just work on having a good integration story with third party models for the next edit (and maybe propose by default a partner model I don't know) or invest a lot more efforts into it.
But currently I sadly have to say the model's "help" is often a net negative.
Improved inline suggestions are under way if you search the PRs on GitHub for zeta2. You can also bring your own edit prediction provider by configuring copilot or supermaven. Codestral edit predictions were merged last week
For me it's.. okay it's my daily driver already, but I really really want extensions to be able to create their own UI elements in the buffer, like VSCode does. Basically GPUI for extensions.
This would unblock people to write their own Jupyter integration for example, or whatever else they want. There's load of cool stuff like Argus https://github.com/cognitive-engineering-lab/argus that rely on creating buffers with custom UI, and Flowistry https://github.com/willcrichton/flowistry that rely on graying out some code, and I want this stuff on Zed too
Has the team commented on this? Coming from Emacs, it seems insane to not implement an API to the UI. GPUI looks great too, it’d be a real shame if they opted to keep the extensibility limited to just LSP servers and whatnot.
GitButler created huge problems for me twice - it automatically added files to commits, including one that contained secrets. Okay, I know I had to add them to .gitignore, but why didn't it prompt me to add the files? There were even logs and cache files, among other things.
Can someone help me understand the pricing of zed? $10 per month- $5 credits for AI credits. This credits can be used for claude code / codex inside zed or should I manage different api keys for codex/claude code?
Keeping data out of Zed’s servers and letting users handle OpenAI billing is a smart trust move—too many tools bury those details, which erodes confidence fast.
Zed is incredibly snappy to open projects and search files but very basic functions like auto-complete (at least in Python and markdown) are still terrible, nowhere close to IntelliJ/Pycharm. Or maybe there is a very specific settings.json incantation that I am missing.
I tried it out this morning and it felt really rough, unfortunately.
It was super slow (thought I think that applies to CLI Codex too), it wasn't outputting any text explaining what it was trying to achieve, and it started off down a path that made no sense. Claude Code in Zed has some rough edges but it's at least usable.
In terms of GUI agents, Cursor is still a lot nicer experience, IMO. Though I do still prefer just using Claude Code cli, personally.
The speed at which this team ships is genuinely insane. I'm already expecting the next blog post to say "We've added fully native support for the M3 Max, Windows, and a built-in neural net for generating feature flag names. Oh, and here's the Zed 1.0 release candidate.
As much as I like this initiative (I'm a Zed user), what is available in the UI as Claude Code is not really Claude Code. It's extremely limited in terms of context management, for example. ACP is reducing these tools to some shared functionality, but that makes them less useful.
28 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 45.0 ms ] threadAn example is that when I have a module like Namespace::SuperAbcModule in a file at namespace/super_abc_module.rb and I rename the file to namespace/super_module.rb, Cursor will immediately suggest to change the module name to `Namespace::SuperModule`, Zed won't.
Also Cursor will suggest updates to lines throughout a file whereas Zed sometimes doesn't even look ahead 1-2 lines.
Having Claude Code and Codex built into the sidebar is hardly better than having them running in a terminal. I wish they'd invested all this time and effort improving the inline suggestions.
But currently I sadly have to say the model's "help" is often a net negative.
This would unblock people to write their own Jupyter integration for example, or whatever else they want. There's load of cool stuff like Argus https://github.com/cognitive-engineering-lab/argus that rely on creating buffers with custom UI, and Flowistry https://github.com/willcrichton/flowistry that rely on graying out some code, and I want this stuff on Zed too
we all want something.
https://gitbutler.com
This team ships so much that if they sold an LTS product, it means they'd support the release for 24 hours.
It was super slow (thought I think that applies to CLI Codex too), it wasn't outputting any text explaining what it was trying to achieve, and it started off down a path that made no sense. Claude Code in Zed has some rough edges but it's at least usable.
In terms of GUI agents, Cursor is still a lot nicer experience, IMO. Though I do still prefer just using Claude Code cli, personally.