LCD 047

If you're happy with the set of languages it supports, [YouCompleteMe](http://valloric.github.io/YouCompleteMe/) is pretty good at what it does. And if you're not married to Vim, [InteliJ IDEA](http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/), [PyCharm](http://www.jetbrains.com/pycharm/), and friends...

Sorry, I haven't followed neovim development recently. I'll probably look at it again when / if they actually produce some kind of release.

I suppose I should update you guys on this. The short version is, it should be possible to make syntastic do async checks using [vimproc](https://github.com/Shougo/vimproc) alone, but there would be...

@spacepluk As I explained in #822, this is a bug in your environment, and syntastic has absolutely no control over it.

I'm afraid I barely know what Elixir is, let alone how it works. :) You guys will have to sort it out, and let me know what is the preferred...

Done in 1d19dff. Set `g:syntastic_enable_elixir_checker` to 1 in your vimrc to re-enable the checker.

@alxndr It's an Elixir issue, not a syntastic one. Or, put another way: if anybody has figured out yet how to make Elixir run syntactic checks without also executing the...

> can't we just change the makeprg to elixirc , which compiles the code instead of running it? Actually, `elixirc` is just a [script](https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/blob/master/bin/elixirc) around `elixir`. It doesn't solve any...

> Would it be weird to bundle a script like this in syntastic? Not at all, other checkers already do that, f.i. `erlang/escript` and `python/python`. Still, I'd prefer the script...

@ericlathrop: One more thing: the existing checker also uses `mix`. Can you please explain how would this come into play, keeping in mind that to me "elixir" is stuff that...