I think it's great that we have such a variety of editors and IDEs to choose from and find one that meets best meets our individual needs. Over the years I've used BBEdit, TextMate, IntelliJ, and Emacs for development. For the past couple of years it's been switching between the last two. I'm glad you've found VS Code to be a match for you. I've spent time configuring all of them to aid in development.
ust like there's more than one hammer on the market, or more than one drill, each has its strengths and weaknesses. There have definitely been frustrating times configuring Emacs, but one of the reasons it's paid off over the years is that when I run into an issue, I can always dig into it and potentially fix it myself; and when I want to extend it to do sometime it can't do yet, I can do that, too.
It's an investment, but it's one that I think has paid off, and will continue to pay off. Emacs has been applicable in more situations and environments than those other tools. (IntelliJ's tooling has been useful, but I've also run into bugs that have impeded my work, which I can't fix on my own because the source isn't open.) I also do a lot of work in Clojure, so Emacs Lisp isn't much of a jump. Admittedly this might not be the case for everyone.
I think another big reason I've stuck with Emacs is that the cost of switching editors as they come along (I hear Atom is really nice, and people have been talking positively about Sublime for years) has a cost as well. Emacs is long in the tooth, which is a curse (Emacs Lisp is a really old lisp) and a blessing (it's unlikely to go away any time soon, and that time spent learning Emacs Lisp is going to continue to pay off).
Please don't read this as apologia for Emacs or as a criticism of your choice, as it's neither. I'm just trying to add some context to how others may justify the time they've spent customizing Emacs.
And I'll add that you don't need to limit yourself to just one. I do most of my text editing and development in Emacs, but when I'm working in Java, I'll use IntelliJ. I miss out on some of the key bindings and workflow I'm used to in Emacs, but for me the other features IntelliJ affords me when working with Java are worth it.
ust like there's more than one hammer on the market, or more than one drill, each has its strengths and weaknesses. There have definitely been frustrating times configuring Emacs, but one of the reasons it's paid off over the years is that when I run into an issue, I can always dig into it and potentially fix it myself; and when I want to extend it to do sometime it can't do yet, I can do that, too.
It's an investment, but it's one that I think has paid off, and will continue to pay off. Emacs has been applicable in more situations and environments than those other tools. (IntelliJ's tooling has been useful, but I've also run into bugs that have impeded my work, which I can't fix on my own because the source isn't open.) I also do a lot of work in Clojure, so Emacs Lisp isn't much of a jump. Admittedly this might not be the case for everyone.
I think another big reason I've stuck with Emacs is that the cost of switching editors as they come along (I hear Atom is really nice, and people have been talking positively about Sublime for years) has a cost as well. Emacs is long in the tooth, which is a curse (Emacs Lisp is a really old lisp) and a blessing (it's unlikely to go away any time soon, and that time spent learning Emacs Lisp is going to continue to pay off).
Please don't read this as apologia for Emacs or as a criticism of your choice, as it's neither. I'm just trying to add some context to how others may justify the time they've spent customizing Emacs.