[UX] rewind should not default to undoing code changes

Additionally we should be able to undo a rewind when we accidentally rewind code changes because of this default

edit: you said that i read the title and came to complain lol

There's a confirmation dialog that allows you to choose whether to rewind conversation, code, or both! If you really don't want the rewind code functionality, you also have the option to disable it entirely in /config

@hackyon-anthropic You are assuming that the confirmation dialog is sufficient as-is and it's not.

The feature is great, and disabling it is not desirable.

For those of us who used double-escape regularly since CC was released, the order of the confirmation dialog is destructive for the muscle memory of esc-esc-up-enter.

Given that it is a one-way door and there is no undo for accidentally reverting changes when the intent was to rewind only the conversation, the ordering is the wrong UX choice.

Requiring the one extra step of tapping down adds a level of safety and preserves the original functionality with the same muscle memory, making the rewind code a progressive enhancement to long-existing functionality rather than turning muscle memory for a benign action into a potentially destructive one.

hey @adamavenir. I apologize for any frustration that this may have caused. Unfortunately, I have received different feedback for different people about the ordering, and this is what we came up with that works for the time being. If it proves to be really annoying for your workflow/muscle memory, I'd recommend disabling it for the time being so it doesn't end up too destructive!

@hackyon-anthropic why not let us customize the menu then? just telling users turn of a feature that they want.... antrhopic really doesnt give a shit about their end users i guess.. not a personal dig.... but this seems to be the them the last month or 2, anthropic doesnt gaf...

@hackyon-anthropic Your viewpoint is valid, particularly in the context of "all things being equal" it's fine. But all things aren't equal because the feature already worked consistently for months in a nondestructive way.

I am making a case not in terms "what users might prefer" but based on UX principles that represent the contract a piece of software makes with its users' trust.

I think replacing/enhancing functionality is absolutely fine in the context of "two-way doors", but it's unintentionally user hostile to your most avid users to replace this ingrained functionality with no ability to undo.

It only takes a momentary mistake to cause data loss.

Keep in mind, too, that Claude Code is the UX leader here and now your users are also codex users (etc) and the same muscle memory action is nondestructive there; so the danger will persist.

Removing the functionality is an undesirable option, of course.

Add an "undo" for this and I have no problem with the choice whatsoever. But this has introduced surface area for destructive mistakes, on the order of mapping "copy" keyboard shortcut to "quit".

Be well. Thank you for listening :)

This issue has been automatically locked since it was closed and has not had any activity for 7 days. If you're experiencing a similar issue, please file a new issue and reference this one if it's relevant.