As a grapical IDE user, should I be interested in traditional editors? [closed]

Question

I use full blown graphical IDEs such as Eclipse CDT (Linux) and Visual Studio (Windows) which have features like auto completion, built in debugging, etc. These are features that I feel I can't live without.

I keep hearing about how many people use emacs/vim on a daily basis. How come people still use console based editors when graphical IDEs appear to be easier to use? I know how to use vim and emacs, but for day-to-day programming I just use an IDE as I find myself being more productive.

This is not a vim vs emacs question so please don't argue one against the other, please instead argue graphical IDE against console IDE.

As I'm already familiar with graphical IDEs, am I likely to gain any productive advantage by using emacs/vim instead?

I expect the answer is "maybe not", simply because of the learning curve, and I'd miss the usual graphical IDE features such as auto complete and the built in debugger; but apparently emacs supports auto complete and debugging. However, to someone who uses a standard GUI text editor, I'd probably say that they should use emacs/vim. What do you think?

Related questions:

• SciTE user wants to know if they should use emacs.
• vi user wants to know if they should learn emacs.

Answer 1

There is an advantage to learning to master a command line editor for those situations where a full IDE is not available. I know people who swear by VIM and people who swear by Emacs. I think the latter is more configurable, but you might not even need that. Since you already know VI, it might be enough for your needs.

I humbly admit that in the few situations where I do need to edit not through an IDE, I just use pico... :(

All that being said, I do have the impression that for some people in certain programmer subcultures and companies, using emacs rather than an IDE is an issue of honor, like using leaves rather than TP on camping trips.