Daniel Kraus <dan...@kraus.my> writes: > Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes: > >> Daniel Kraus <dan...@kraus.my> writes: >> >>> +(defcustom org-babel-clojure-backend (cond >>> + ((executable-find "bb") 'babashka) >>> + ((executable-find "nbb") 'nbb) >>> + ((featurep 'cider) 'cider) >>> + ((featurep 'inf-clojure) >>> 'inf-clojure) >>> + ((featurep 'slime) 'slime) >>> + (t nil)) >> >> What if users have, say, cider installed and also babashka executable? >> Will it be expected to use babashka? > > Yes. The only thing that makes me slightly hesitant is that e.g. > someone doesn't have `bb` installed. Executes clojure source blocks > which are then evaluated in, let's say cider. > Then they install `bb` and the next time they start Emacs, the same > source block on re-evaluation would be executed with babashka. > > I think this is still the best out of the box experience as it > "just works" for most users without having to customise something > and if they want it fixed, they can pin it to a certain backend. > > What's your opinion? > > Cheers, > Daniel
I vote for use Clojure CLI like bb as default backend. Keeping defcustom option for user to setting default backend is fine. -- [ stardiviner ] I try to make every word tell the meaning that I want to express without misunderstanding. Blog: https://stardiviner.github.io/ IRC(libera.chat, freenode): stardiviner, Matrix: stardiviner GPG: F09F650D7D674819892591401B5DF1C95AE89AC3
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
