As I said, it's culture. C# is a pretty decent language, but all of this is so far removed from what I (and others) want that they sound like negatives, not positives.

In the exact same way that I might say "I use Arch Linux, and the only GUI program is Firefox. I live my entire life in the terminal, in vim, and I use languages that have no ceremony in the first place and prefer log statements to debuggers." That probably sounds like all downside to you.

Use whatever you like. It's not that important.

The difference is that Python and Ruby (and similar languages) don't have this boilerplate to begin with. Someone writing Python for a living doesn't have to use an IDE (most don't), but for a Java dev it's almost a requirement.

Like the parent of your comment said: There is nothing bad about it. It's a cultural gap.

I would never resort to a language like C#. It doesn't mean I think less of the language. I just prefer Ruby.

I like not having to use IDEs. I like my text editors.

Discussing languages is like discussion flavours. It's just preference. It's like asking me why I prefer bananas over apples. I just do.

You can either write a program that'll help you create programs in a language it can understand (the IDE way), or you can use a language that's so powerfull that no program can completely understand, and use it to write simpler programs, avoiding the need of automating things (the Lisp way). Anyway, you can not have both, but you can be in between.

Python is not at the Lisp extreme, but it's not very far from it.