Cursor vs GitHub Copilot: Which AI Editor is Better for Python - #802
Open
brianMutea wants to merge 13 commits into
Open
Cursor vs GitHub Copilot: Which AI Editor is Better for Python#802brianMutea wants to merge 13 commits into
brianMutea wants to merge 13 commits into
Conversation
… is Better for Python?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds a prompt transcript file for the “Cursor vs GitHub Copilot: Which AI Editor Is Better for Python” article materials, documenting the exact prompts used to compare both editors across setup, implementation, testing/debugging, planning, and review tasks.
Changes:
- Added a new
prompts.mddocumenting the prompts used throughout the comparison workflow. - Included example persistent-instructions snippets for both Cursor project rules and GitHub Copilot repository instructions.
Suppressed comments (7)
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:21
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Use this prompt in **Agent** mode after setting up the project. It defines the requirements for the command-line Markdown note manager, including Markdown storage, YAML frontmatter, the note data model, SQLite persistence, and the command-line interface. :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:40
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Use this prompt in **Agent** mode after deliberately removing the `self._conn.commit()` call from `NoteStore.add_note()`. It asks the editor to run the existing tests, investigate any failures, fix the underlying problem, and verify the fix by running the complete test suite again. :contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:51
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Use this prompt in **Plan** mode to compare how Cursor and GitHub Copilot plan a multi-file change before modifying the project. The feature adds support for archiving notes while keeping archived notes out of normal searches and listings unless explicitly requested. :contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:65
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Use this prompt in **Ask** mode after deliberately replacing the parameterized search query with an interpolated SQL query. It asks the editor to inspect the database layer for correctness, SQL safety, and code quality without changing the implementation. :contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:75
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Use the `/review` command in Cursor after introducing the SQL injection vulnerability. Unlike the broader review in Ask mode, `/review` focuses on the changes in the current diff and identifies issues introduced by those changes. :contentReference[oaicite:5]{index=5}
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:87
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Add the following instructions to `.cursor/rules/markdown-note-manager-rules.mdc`. The rule applies to Python files and gives Cursor persistent guidance about type hints, YAML parsing, file operations, SQL queries, and the note representation. :contentReference[oaicite:6]{index=6}
cursor-vs-copilot-python/prompts.md:106
- Remove the
:contentReference[oaicite:…]{…}citation artifact; it isn't valid Markdown for this repo and will render as stray text.
Add the following instructions to `.github/copilot-instructions.md`. GitHub Copilot uses this file as persistent repository guidance when working on the project. :contentReference[oaicite:7]{index=7}
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
… is Better for Python?
Added rules for the Cursor project regarding Markdown note management, including coding conventions and guidelines for Python files.
Removed the Cursor Project Rules section and its details from the markdown note manager rules.
Removed detailed instructions for GitHub Copilot from the markdown file.
Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Author
|
Hi @stephengruppetta, I’ve pushed the code. |
…comparisons between Cursor and GitHub Copilot.
…r is Better for Python?
…AI Editor is Better for Python?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…er for Python?
Where to put new files:
my-awesome-articleHow to merge your changes: