[gberger]

Not to be confused with Visual Studio Code, the text editor, which will remain supported.

[rco8786]

> the text editor

This is...not a super accurate way to describe VSCode

[swatcoder]

It’s in the same feature family as emacs, Sublime, Notepad++, etc — all of which are called text editors.

They all have extension architectures that expand on what that means, but they all cover the same kind of use cases and they all stop short of traditional Integrated Development Environments.

Unless you’re saying that none of the others should be called text editors either (a daunting uphill fight against history), it’s an exactly accurate description.

[belfthrow]

From the crappy bolt on things required to make it anywhere close to a decent IDE, it is essentially vim with tons of incompatible plugins that continually conflict one and other.

[LoganDark]

It is a text editor. People treat it as an IDE, because it can be made that way with plugins, but fundamentally it is a text editor.

[irrational]

It is not integrated, so it is not an IDE. Text editor seems like the best description for it.

[outside1234]

This was how the Visual Studio crowd inside of Microsoft described it until VSCode basically destroyed their business. :)

[krylon]

It's technically correct (which as everyone knows is the best kind of correct), it just, uh, omits a few details for the sake of brevity.

[averageRoyalty]

Isn't it? I use it daily and that's precisely how I'd describe it.

[jug]

With Microsoft backtracking on their Visual Studio non-Code designer interface and no longer offering it for modern Windows apps (WinUI 3)… Honestly… Is this a long term plan to just sunset Visual Studio?

It always felt like it to me. From the get go. But they deny it. Still, Visual Studio is so heavy, feels sluggish, written in WPF, and not from an era of modern, plugin-based software development.

Visual Studio Code also offers many features VS don’t. Oh, and it perfectly debugged Python code on Windows for me (VS somehow failed to attach its debugger to Python.exe) and auto-detected venv’s for me from the mere folder structure, none of which Visual Studio did.

Code feels like the .NET Core of Microsoft editors to me. Not only new thing for cross-platform development, but the next thing for Windows development too. Just like .NET Core.

Sure, Code still miss things but those only feel like extensions away at best. A far better and less monolithic design. Now, if we could only have it be WebView2 based rather than Electron on Windows and cut 50% RAM use right off the bat…

[biugbkifcjk]

As someone that works with a lot of different languages - vscode has been amazing. I feel its inevitable that a majority of the plugins I rely on start requiring some sort of subscription - which I'm not looking forward too.

[usrusr]

Denial might be as much a show for the motivation of the team that keeps maintaining the relic for some large old cash cow customers as it perhaps is for the outside world. Old customers that are perfectly locked in across the entire product portfolio. But if VS suddenly disappeared, all the other business they have with those customers would suddenly be open for reconsideration as well.

[delfinom]

Dunno man, to me VSCode feels sluggish.

It takes a significant amount of clicks debugging C++. I can't just have the file and debug views present at the same time, I have to keep jumping back and forth.

The launch json config system also introduced a ridiculous amount of verbosity, not to mention it's insanely easy to multi launch instances and confuse yourself.

[alexvoda]

The WPF version of VS has supported many plugins from the start (2010). The previous version (2003-2008) also supported plugins but not sure how extensively. Before that VS was just the name for a suite of different tools (Visual C++, Visual Basic, Visual InterDev and a few others).

[kiririn]

Visual Studio will stick around for use cases like game dev, driver dev, etc