Daniel Kraus <daniel@kraus.my> writes:

> Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> Daniel Kraus <daniel@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