If you debug without knowing what you're debugging and just looking for getting it running, it sounds like you're the one doing the shotgun-programming/debugging, separate debugger or not.
So, yes. I use a debugger, so that I can spend some time at home too. Because as nice as the office is, it's summertime, and there's beer in my fridge.
Back when I was seventeen and staying up all night writing a video game engine though, I definitely would have been onboard with the whole print debugging idea.
But again, I must be wrong because I'm doing it different, right? So the only option can be that I'm too young, don't know what I'm talking about, or just lack experience in general, right? There couldn't be a possible way that someone else uses a different solution that works just as fine for them, right?
Considering that I never said "Don't use a debugger." only that "I don't need a debugger", you guys seem pretty worked up considering that you're claiming you're the more relaxed one.
It's a tool, don't take it personally that I have a different method that works. It doesn't invalidate yours. At least not in my view.
Because if you're leaning on print statements in absence of appropriate tooling, I can understand that. When the tooling is available, however, I am skeptical of claims as to enhanced productivity or any other positivity coming from it.
There's a debugger, there's a REPL, and in general lots of tools which I use if I see the need (the NYTProf profiler would be one). Using a debugger in this scenario (with an interpreted language) just doesn't give me any enhanced productivity over what I'm doing now.
What does visual studio? Show the value of variables in separate windows as the code runs? Yes, the perl debugger can do that. You can also inject code and poke the entire program state.
The perl debugger is a perl function that is called for every line and every subroutine entry. Use that to build whatever tool you want, and good luck finding that in Visual Studio.