But fair question. If tmux already fits your workflow, there may be no reason to switch. hrdx is more opinionated around running multiple coding agents across projects: it provides a workspace and pane sidebar, agent activity and completion status, built-in launch/resume flows, persistent sessions and layouts, and an external control API. The tradeoff is that it is much younger and less configurable than tmux.
Try it, play around with it, love it or hate it :-)
Claude Code stopped working in tmux for me at some point. Which is of course more of a CC problem than a tmux one, but maybe OP was trying to work around such issues.
No idea what your problem is but this is categorically false. CC broke tmux when they briefly tried to open subagents inside their own tmux sessions but they've since resolved it. But they do take over the mouse mode I think.
cc works fine for me in tmux. there is also the `/tui` command that will change the behavior of the harness from one that intercepts scrolling etc (they call this fullscreen) and the default. I run mine in default mode.
This looks nice. But I'm curious -- you're clearly inspired by https://herdr.dev (me too) but you must have had some reason to build your own version. So what's unique or what did you want to change?
Yes, absolutely inspired by herdr. The main reason I built hrdx was that I wanted to explore the idea in Go and shape it around my own workflow. I focused on persistent PTY sessions, workspace and Git branch organization, agent activity indicators, custom agent harnesses, and a socket API for external automation. There is definitely overlap, and I'm not claiming the underlying idea is unique. It is mostly my own take on the same problem.
Yeah, I've got a lot of tooling in Go and have been building some workflows on top of herdr, so a Go version of the same concept is a bit nicer to work with for me. I'll have to play with it a bit more later. Which PTY are you using?
I'm using github.com/aymanbagabas/go-pty. It gives hrdx a common interface for Unix PTYs and Windows ConPTY. The terminal emulator itself is implemented inside hrdx. I would be interested to hear how it fits your workflows once you have had time to try it.
I hadn't seen herdr until just now but I built a similar tool with it's own keyboard bindings https://github.com/hadlock/cscope . Claude Code changed some underlying changes to copy-paste so it needs updating. But I think this kind of "I wish my workspace did this/had these features" is a pretty common trope. It is about $10 worth of your employer's monthly token allocation (or personal account if you pay for one) and then improves output so I call it a win-win. Mine is a bit more chaotic, 80s era neon color scheme but accomplishes the same feature. All those "personal tooling" blog posts get voted up for a reason.
TL;DR why would I accept someone elses' vibe coded tool, when I can build my own to my exact specification?
These tools are personal because everyones workflow, preferred keybindings, and visual organization differ. Building exactly what you want can be more useful than adapting to a general solution, and the process is valuable too. cscope looks interesting, and I like that it takes a more colorful approach. Thanks for sharing it.
hrdx was created, among other reasons, because I wanted full support for my own coding agent, zot.sh, without having to wait for a PR to be merged.
But fair question. If tmux already fits your workflow, there may be no reason to switch. hrdx is more opinionated around running multiple coding agents across projects: it provides a workspace and pane sidebar, agent activity and completion status, built-in launch/resume flows, persistent sessions and layouts, and an external control API. The tradeoff is that it is much younger and less configurable than tmux.
Try it, play around with it, love it or hate it :-)
hrdx looks great, but as it does it's own multiplexing, I'm not sure the post's rationale is suggesting something like hrdx.
TL;DR why would I accept someone elses' vibe coded tool, when I can build my own to my exact specification?