This isn't helpful.
First of all, Emacs is an excellent IDE for Lisp and has a built-in debugger, sensitive completion and automatic documentation, while Visual Studio can't do any of those things you thought were important until you install Visual C/C++.
Is Visual Studio "just" a editor with a plugin system?
Why are you so interested in giving emacs such a negative label?
> I would be interested in seeing similar environments for C#/Java as well as for dynamic languages like ruby/python/php, which IDEs have also been handling very well lately.
For python, there's Ropemacs: http://rope.sourceforge.net/ropemacs.html
For perl, there's Sepia: http://cpansearch.perl.org/src/SEANO/Sepia-0.97/Sepia.html
I don't program in C# or Java or Ruby or PHP regularly so I don't know about them off the top of my head.
I would be interested in seeing similar environments for C#/Java as well as for dynamic languages like ruby/python/php, which IDEs have also been handling very well lately. I've also noticed in general that it's difficult to make an IDE for c/c++ that works better than editors. They compile slowly, The macro system severely complicates quick parsing, C++'s grammar in particular is very difficult to parse and analyze, the languages do not make run-time loading of code easy, and they don't provide much in the way of RTTI. In short, they are not very IDE-friendly languages. Java and C# are the perfect IDE languages, and dynamic languages suffer from not providing enough static information.