I agree that proper logging can replace the need for a debugger in many instances, but so can proper testing, talented devs, unlimited time, unlimited budget, etc.
Under ideal circumstances (i.e. not real world), no one would ever need to fire up a debugger, but (most of us) don't work in those conditions.
Can you create world-class software using only print statements to debug? Sure. Is that an efficient use of your time? Probably not.
The bottom line is debuggers are just another tool in the development aresenal, and dismissing them merely because you can accomplish the same task in another way is asinine.
Queue 1000 comments from people gloating about how they too are "too good for debuggers". I work with a number of people who don't use a debugger, primarily because they never took the time learn how to use one. They often spend hours and hours inserting print statements, recompiling, redeploying, etc. for problems that can be solved in 5 minutes by using a debugger. Print statements are fine if you're debugging your "vending machine" project for CS101, but they don't work well for large, complex projects where you only work on a subset of the codebase. Don't let me dissuade you, though -- you guys keep using your print statements, and I'll be the superstar getting the same work done in a fraction of the time.
Under ideal circumstances (i.e. not real world), no one would ever need to fire up a debugger, but (most of us) don't work in those conditions.
Can you create world-class software using only print statements to debug? Sure. Is that an efficient use of your time? Probably not.
The bottom line is debuggers are just another tool in the development aresenal, and dismissing them merely because you can accomplish the same task in another way is asinine.