I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0
4 months ago
- #AI-coding
- #workflow-optimization
- #developer-tools
- Claude Code 2.0 represents a paradigm shift in AI-assisted coding, with Opus 4.5 enabling behavior-level abstraction.
- Comparison between Cursor and Claude Code: Cursor is better for learning and tight feedback loops, while Claude Code excels at abstraction and output-focused tasks.
- Key tools in the workflow: Claude Code for most tasks, Cursor for UI perfection, ChatGPT for questions, Ghostty as terminal, Wispr for voice-to-text.
- Setup involves global and project-specific commands (/setup-claude-code and /setup-repo) that configure the environment through an interview process.
- Context management techniques include spawning subagents, compacting, transferring context, and monitoring context usage.
- Planning is crucial - time spent on prompts saves debugging time, with Shift+Tab for plan mode and /interview-me-planmd for in-depth planning.
- Verification through interface testing is key - test behaviors rather than reviewing code directly.
- Debugging AI code requires systematic approaches - use /debug command, show examples, or start fresh when stuck.
- Parallel work management involves multiple terminals, smart commits (/commit-smart), and careful branch strategy.
- Advanced features include custom subagents, hooks, skills, and MCP for external service integration.
- Headless mode (-p flag) enables scripting and automation of Claude Code tasks.
- The guide emphasizes that while tools will change, principles of planning, verifiability, and closing loops will persist.