read 0 byte, err read tcp 127.0.0.1:8800: i/o timeout: is seen as an error line, so
makeprgautomatically parses it and puts into the quickfix list.
I'm not familiar with Vim plugin development but with a bit of digging I found the file where the parsing patterns are defined:
CompilerSet errorformat= \%-G#\ %.%#, \%-G%.%#panic:\ %m, \%Ecan\'t\ load\ package:\ %m, \%A%f:%l:%c:\ %m, \%A%f:%l:\ %m, \%C%*\\s%m, \%-G%.%#
I read the QuickFix error format documentation to understand these patterns, and I figured while doing so that I would add comments to the repository for the next reader to come along who isn't familiar with these patterns and tokens.
I got into the habit of using inline comments in this type of situation when documenting complicated regex patterns in Python. It's really useful. I wanted to do the same here, so I tried using
" Define the patterns that will be recognized by QuickFix when parsing the output of GoRun. " More information at http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/quickfix.html#errorformat CompilerSet errorformat= \%-G#\ %.%#, " Ignore lines beginning with "#" ("# command-line-arguments" line sometimes appears?) \%-G%.%#panic:\ %m, " Ignore lines containing "panic: message" \%Ecan\'t\ load\ package:\ %m, " Start of multiline error string is "can't load package: message" \%A%f:%l:%c:\ %m, " Start of multiline unspecified string is "filename:linenumber:columnnumber: message" \%A%f:%l:\ %m, " Start of multiline unspecified string is "filename:linenumber: message" \%C%*\\s%m, " Continuation of multiline error message is indented \%-G%.%# " All lines not matching any of the above patterns are ignored
If this worked correctly, it wouldn't change the behavior of the plugin at all; but I found that QuickFix stopped working entirely after this change. If the syntax highlighting on GitHub is to be believed, most of these aren't actually being parsed as comments. I searched around and found "Commenting is simple: put a double quote to the left of the text you want to comment" on the Vim Tips Wiki but apparently it's not so simple as that.
A question on SO points to a similar issue, but I'm not defining mappings here and the different lines are actually part of the same command, so I can't just separate them.
According to an existing question here on Vi.SE, it's not possible to use inline comments with multi-line statements. So, how can I add a brief explanation for each pattern in the source, corresponding directly to the pattern where it appears in the code? I'd rather not throw it all into an overly-verbose multi-line comment in front of the