My Experience with Cursor IDE: A Game-Changer for Developers?

Generated by ChatGPT (DALL-E)

Introduction

As a developer, I’m always on the lookout for tools that can make my workflow more efficient, intuitive, and enjoyable. Recently, I decided to test out Cursor IDE, a relatively new player in the world of AI-powered development environments. To give it a fair shot, I subscribed to the Pro plan for a month and built a small web application using Vue.js 3 for the frontend and Spring Boot with Kotlin for the backend. Here’s what I loved, what didn’t work so well, and my overall verdict.

What I Loved About Cursor IDE

1. Starting from Scratch Was a Breeze

One of the first things I noticed was how well Cursor IDE handled writing first components and features. When I described in detail what I needed — whether it was a specific component, algorithm, or even a UI layout — it generated code that was surprisingly accurate. For example, I needed some additional options for my tiles, like edit, delete, etc., but I was unsure how it should look like, so i just said “Add some basic options to the tiles”. Cursor created an awesome floating options, visible on hover, on right upper tile corners. Just like that.

2. UI Design That Just Works

I rarely explicitly defined my UI design preferences, yet Cursor IDE consistently delivered clean, intuitive layouts. It seemed to understand the context of my project and made design decisions that felt natural. For instance, when I asked it to add a dashboard page, it included charts, tables, and navigation elements that fit seamlessly with the existing design. The CSS handling was also impressive — new components matched the existing style without any manual tweaking.

3. “What’s Missing?” Feature

One of my favorite features was the ability to ask Cursor IDE to add anything that might be missing or useful on a page. For example, when I wasn’t sure what else to include on a settings page, it suggested adding a dark mode toggle, a language selector, and a save button — all of which were genuinely helpful additions.

4. Autocompletion That Feels actually smart

The autocompletion in Cursor IDE is leagues ahead of other AI tools I use in my everyday work. It not only suggests code snippets but also adapts to changes in real-time. For example, if I refactored an object type or fixed a bug, Cursor IDE would immediately guide me (via tabs) to the next potential issue in the code. It felt like having a pair programmer who truly understood my thought process.

5. Bug Fixing That Feels Like Magic

Bug fixing was another area where Cursor IDE shone. I could simply describe the issue in plain English, simply like saying whats wrong on your app, and it would not only identify the problem but also provide a fix — even for complex bugs, in no time. In rare occasions it needed second try, sometimes even third if the issue is more complex and requires small refactoring, but at the end it will get it fixed. That saved me a ton of time.

6. Transparent Code Generation

Every time Cursor IDE generated code, it provided a detailed explanation of the steps it took and the decisions it made. This made it easy to review and understand the changes before accepting or rejecting them. It felt like collaborating with a thoughtful and transparent teammate.

7. Great Value for the Price

Compared to other AI tools, I don’t want to name any, Cursor IDE offers more features at a similar price point. For the amount of time and effort it saved me, I’d say it’s definitely worth the investment.

What Didn’t Work So Well

1. Refactoring Was Hit-or-Miss

While Cursor IDE excelled at generating new code, refactoring was a different story. For example, when I asked it to extract utility functions into a separate class, it did so — but left the original functions untouched. It also created unnecessary utility functions that I didn’t need, which added clutter to my codebase. In some cases, refactoring left the code uncompilable, and I had to manually fix it.

2. Component Extraction Issues

When I tried to move parts of a component to a new one, Cursor IDE sometimes changed the functionality (or removed the feature). For instance, it removed certain if checks and moved functions to new classes without deleting them from the original class. This led to a lot of frustration as I had to manually reconcile the changes.

3. Cache Issues When Switching Agents

Cursor IDE allows you to switch between different AI agents (e.g., from the default to Claude). However, I noticed that switching agents seemed to erase its cache, making it lose context about the code it had already generated. This was particularly frustrating when working on a larger project, as I had to re-explain the context multiple times. My advice? Stick to one agent for the duration of your project.

4. Unintended Feature Deletion

On a few occasions, Cursor IDE deleted features without any obvious reason. This was especially problematic when working on a page with multiple components and many features. Always review the changes carefully before accepting them!

Final Thoughts

Despite its quirks, Cursor IDE is a powerful tool that has the potential to revolutionize the way developers work. Its ability to generate clean, functional code, fix bugs, and suggest useful features is unparalleled. However, it’s not without its flaws — particularly when it comes to refactoring and maintaining context.

Would I recommend it? Absolutely. For small to medium-sized projects, it’s a game-changer. Just be prepared to review its work carefully, especially when refactoring or switching agents. With a few improvements, Cursor IDE could easily become the go-to IDE for developers everywhere.