If you can't code without a feature-rich text-editor, you might then ask: how good are you really at coding, and how much skill are you off-loading to the editor? Because if you can't code with Windows' notepad.exe you need to re-evaluate your perceived skill and your /reliance/ on an editor.
If I hired a carpenter and they showed up with a pair of pliers and nothing else, I wouldn’t let them start. Even if they were competent and motivated, I’d know they were going to get sucked into completely avoidable problems and they’d be way less time-efficient than a less competent peer who actually uses the appropriate tools.
If I were interviewing a software engineer and they didn’t use at least some programming editor (I don’t really care which: Sublime, Emacs, VS Code, PyCharm, anything), I’d assume they were either not very good at this or that they’re so idiosyncratic their coworkers would wish harm on them.
It’s not my job to tell a carpenter which hammer to use. But if they see a nail and reach for a spirit level, I’m sending them home.
I opened each one of those tools and had absolutely no clue how to use that! Looking at them now, they seems quite easy and similar, but that is only because I know how to program now.
Think about MS Access. It could be said that you don't know how to use relational DBs is you can't write perfect SQL on a napkin, but MS Access is certainly a skill and just because it can make it easier to view/manipulate data doesn't invalidate the need of skill to use the tool.
If you can code in a notepad, good for you, but if an IDE or something like VSC or Sublime increase your productivity then that's more valuable then remembering the exact names of methods or imports