代码自动完成。它对探索代码有很大帮助。

我从相反的方向来回答这个问题。我从小就在Makefile+Emacs的环境中编程。从我最早的DOS编译器，微软的Quick C，我有一个IDE自动化的事情。我在Visual c++ 6.0上工作了很多年，当我毕业到Enterprise Java时，我使用Borland JBuilder，然后决定使用Eclipse，这对我来说已经变得非常高效。

Throughout my initial self-teaching, college, and now professional career, I have come to learn that any major software development done solely within the IDE becomes counterproductive. I say this because most IDE's wants you to work in their peculiar I-control-how-the-world-works style. You have to slice and dice your projects along their lines. You have manage your project builds using their odd dialog boxes. Most IDE's manage complex build dependencies between projects poorly, and dependencies can be difficult to get working 100%. I have been in situations where IDE's would not produce a working build of my code unless I did a Clean/Rebuild All. Finally, there's rarely a clean way to move your software out of development and into other environments like QA or Production from an IDE. It's usually a clicky fest to get all your deployment units built, or you've got some awkward tool that the IDE vendor gives you to bundle stuff up. But again, that tool usually demands that your project and build structure absolutely conforms to their rules - and sometimes that just won't work for your projects' requirements.

我了解到，要与团队一起进行大规模开发，如果我们使用IDE开发代码，并使用手动编写的命令行脚本进行所有构建，那么我们可以获得最高的效率。(我们喜欢用Apache Ant进行Java开发。)我们发现在IDE中运行我们的脚本对于复杂的构建来说只是一个点击或者自动化的噩梦，用alt+tab到一个shell并在那里运行脚本要容易得多(而且破坏性更小)。

Manual builds requires us to miss out on some of the niceties in the modern IDE like background compilation, but what we gain is much more critical: clean and easy builds that can live in multiple environments. The "one click build" all those agile guys talk about? We have it. Our build scripts can be directly invoked by continuous integration systems as well. Having builds managed through continuous integration allows us to more formally stage and migrate your code deployments to different environments, and lets us know almost immediately when someone checks in bad code that breaks the build or unit tests.

In truth, my taking the role of build away from the IDE hasn't hurt us too badly. The intellisense and refactoring tools in Eclipse are still completely useful and valid - the background compilation simply serves to support those tools. And, Eclipse's peculiar slicing of projects has served as a very nice way to mentally break down our problem sets in a way everyone can understand (still a tad bit verbose for my tastes though). I think one of the most important things about Eclipse is the excellent SCM integrations, that's what makes team development so enjoyable. We use Subversion+Eclipse, and that has been very productive and very easy to train our people to become experts at.

我更喜欢IDE，因为它允许我集成编辑/编译/调试，只需单击一下从错误跳转到生成错误的行。此外，它允许使用操作系统标准接口显示多个信息窗格。简而言之，它为用户提供了一个基于鼠标的输入界面和一个现代的输出界面，而不是依靠上世纪70年代的技术和界面来帮助我。

IDE还有更复杂的用户和用途，我并没有说我使用过他们或了解他们所有人。当我需要的时候，我会学习它们。

简单地说，IDE提供了比简单编辑器更省时的特性。

我使用Emacs作为开发和邮件/新闻的主要环境已经有大约10年了(1994-2004)。当我在2004年强迫自己学习Java时，我发现了IDE的力量，令我惊讶的是，我实际上喜欢IDE (IntelliJ IDEA)。

我不会详细说明原因，因为很多原因已经在这里提到过了——只要记住，不同的人喜欢不同的功能。我和一个同事使用同一个IDE，我们都只使用了可用功能的一小部分，我们都不喜欢彼此使用IDE的方式(但我们都喜欢IDE本身)。

但是我想强调的是ide相对于Emacs/Vim相关环境有一个优势:您可以花费更少的时间安装/配置所需的特性。

使用Wing IDE(适用于Python)，我可以在安装后15-20分钟开始开发。不知道我需要多少小时才能让我使用的特性在Emacs/Vim中运行。：）

我可以想到使用IDE的几个原因:

综合帮助是最受欢迎的。 内置的重构与Visual Studio预览 智能感知，语法高亮显示，大型项目的导航方便，集成调试等等(尽管我知道通过插件你可能可以在Emacs和Vim中得到很多)。 另外，我认为现在的ide有更广泛的用户基础，可能有更多的人为它们开发插件，但我可能错了。

坦白说，我喜欢我的鼠标。当我使用纯文本编辑器时，它变得很孤独。