It's really VERY simple. But this answer is a bit of a paradox in that I am discussing something only EMBEDDED level developers ever encounter. The reason this is an odd view is that frankly when I was doing embedded work (the brief time I was making any real money) an IDE would be down right STRANGE and most of your coworkers would wonder why you can't remember enough about SNMP/ASN.1 or whatever protocol you were dealing with to just /do your job/. BUT you can NOT, as far as I know, do a graphical simulation of what your microcontroller is doing in something like /real time/ without an "IDE".

ide基本上是:

编辑器/代码完成，重构和文档 调试器 文件系统资源管理器 scm的客户 构建工具

都在一个包里。

您可以使用单独的工具或出色的可编程编辑器和额外的工具，如Emacs(也可以使用Vim，但IDEbility IMO稍微少一些)来实现所有这些功能(以及更多功能)。

如果您发现自己经常在一个实用程序和下一个可以集成到环境中的实用程序之间切换，或者如果您缺少这里列出的一些功能(其他文章中有更完整的功能)，那么可能是时候转移到IDE了(或者通过添加宏之类的方法来提高环境的ideability)。如果你已经用一个以上的程序构建了一个“IDE”(在我上面提到的意义上)，那么就没有必要转移到一个真正的IDE。

IDE可以让人更快更容易地工作……我注意到我花了很多时间在一个简单的文本编辑器中浏览代码……

在一个好的IDE中，如果IDE支持跳转到函数，跳转到之前的编辑位置，跳转到变量……此外，一个好的IDE可以减少试验不同语言特性和项目的时间，因为启动时间可以很短。

我也几乎只使用Vim(几乎是因为我现在正在尝试学习emacs)来完成我的所有开发工作。我认为纯粹的直观性(当然来自GUI)是人们喜欢使用ide的主要原因。通过直观，几乎不需要学习工具的开销。学习开销越少，他们完成的工作就越多。

不同的人可能有不同的原因。对我来说，这些都是优势。

为项目提供了一种完整的感觉。例如，我将有所有相关的项目文件在单一视图。 提供了更高的代码生产力，如 语法高亮显示 程序集引用 智能感知 数据库和相关UI文件的集中视图。 调试特性

最后，它帮助我更快地编写代码，而不是在记事本或写字板上。这是我更喜欢IDE的一个很好的理由。

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.