How an engineer searches a codebase: A deep dive

This title was summarized by AI from the post below.

Really fascinating results, great deep dive! When you think about how an experienced engineer searches a codebase, it's clearly not just "blind", but nor is it exhaustive; you have a rough idea of where to look but then need to iterate as you learn more. And it's a mix of structural and intuitive searching. As awesome as today's AI coding tools are, they've clearly yet to reach the desirable "fast and accurate" corner of the graph, and Jolt AI has a clearly demonstrable advantage still (disclosure: proud advisor and user). Check it out: https://lnkd.in/grQvGn4y

Want to know how Cursor, Windsurf, Copilot, Claude Code, Codex, and Jolt compare on searching large codebases? We benchmarked the code search speed and quality of today's top AI coding tools on open-source codebases, ranging from 780K to 4.7M lines of code, and had a few surprise learnings: - Agentic search is the hot new trend. It's accurate but painfully slow - OpenAI's Codex was very accurate, but averaged nearly 4 minutes vs Jolt at 16 seconds - Claude Code underperformed almost every tool, contradicting the hype it's received - Jolt's semantic search is the best of both worlds My prediction: the future of code search is an agentic hybrid approach, where the agent calls tools like Jolt to pull in relevant context. Check out our full benchmark results (link in comments), and let me know your thoughts.

  • No alternative text description for this image

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories