If a previous mapping using the provided key sequence is defined, the map will fail. silent! prevents this from being a problem (stopping execution or displaying annoying errors).
The long-term effect is to avoid overwriting user mappings in the qf window.
A second solution would be, for each {map} {lhs} {rhs} command, to use
which accomplishes the same effect less concisely.
This should obsolete #255 because it allows my mappings to take precedence.
On a final note, I considered something like
execute "{map} {lhs} {rhs}".maparg({lhs}, "n")
which basically makes the mapping do {rhs} and followed by whatever it originally did, but this has the side effect of potentially creating wonky mappings (e.g., :cclose<CR>:q<CR>) which are not intended. I thus rejected this idea.
If a previous mapping using the provided key sequence is defined, the map will fail.
silent!
prevents this from being a problem (stopping execution or displaying annoying errors).The long-term effect is to avoid overwriting user mappings in the qf window.
A second solution would be, for each
{map} {lhs} {rhs}
command, to usewhich accomplishes the same effect less concisely.
This should obsolete #255 because it allows my mappings to take precedence.
On a final note, I considered something like
which basically makes the mapping do
{rhs}
and followed by whatever it originally did, but this has the side effect of potentially creating wonky mappings (e.g.,:cclose<CR>:q<CR>
) which are not intended. I thus rejected this idea.