Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Hello, > > Chunyang Xu <m...@xuchunyang.me> writes: > >> Here is a patch which can fix the issue. > > Thank you. > >> From e42b22f74c2f04a4d8e7eec0a6bdacbd08bebf12 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Chunyang Xu <m...@xuchunyang.me> >> Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 14:46:51 +0800 >> Subject: [PATCH] ob-C: Fix remote executing >> >> * lisp/ob-C.el (org-babel-C-execute): Process remote bin file. >> >> TINYCHANGE >> --- >> lisp/ob-C.el | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/lisp/ob-C.el b/lisp/ob-C.el >> index 795bcb2b7..e54e17492 100644 >> --- a/lisp/ob-C.el >> +++ b/lisp/ob-C.el >> @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ or `org-babel-execute:C++' or `org-babel-execute:D'." >> (org-babel-eval >> (pcase org-babel-c-variant >> ((or `c `cpp) >> - (concat tmp-bin-file cmdline)) >> + (concat (org-babel-process-file-name tmp-bin-file) cmdline)) > > I see that `tmp-bin-file' is used a couple other times in the body. > Would it make sense to wrap the initial binding within > `org-babel-process-file-name' instead of doing it only for this > occurrence?
Both ways look OK to me. `tmp-bin-file' is used only twice and invoking `org-babel-process-file-name' is cheap. And converting `tmp-bin-file' from remote to local name only when 100% necessary (i.e. within `org-babel-eval') looks more logical to me. On the other hand, `tmp-bin-file' as a remote file name is useless, thus the way you suggested is reasonable as well. > Regards,
