Syntastic and :compiler

[vhda]

Is it possible to make Syntastic support an already configured :compiler? As far as I can see if a third-party plugin wants to support both :compiler and Syntastic it will need to duplicate the 'errorformat' definitions in both files.

If this is true, do you think it would be feasible to allow a Syntastic compiler definition to refer to an already available :compiler?

[lcd047]

@vhda

Is it possible to make Syntastic support an already configured :compiler?

Not currently.

As far as I can see if a third-party plugin wants to support both :compiler and Syntastic it will need to duplicate the 'errorformat' definitions in both files.

The errorformat would only have to be written once, then it would remain unchanged for years, so who cares.

Also, syntastic is useless once you have a compiler set, so why would anybody want to support both a compiler set and a syntastic checker. 😉

If this is true, do you think it would be feasible to allow a Syntastic compiler definition to refer to an already available :compiler?

A simple adapter to create a syntastic checker from a generic compiler set would be possible but awkward, as syntastic has moved away from makeprg and friends a long time ago (it isn't possible to write makeprgs that do proper shell quoting across all OSes). A correct adapter would be hard though, since :compiler actually sources a file, and said file could contain essentially anything.