Re: org-program-exists vs executable-find

[Martyn Jago <martyn.jago@btinternet.com>]

Hi

"Sebastien Vauban"
<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:

> Hi Bastien,
>
> Bastien wrote:
>> "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:
>>
>>>> The name `org-program-exists' is actually misleading, it should be
>>>> `org-executable-call' instead, while still checking if the executable
>>>> exists before calling it.
>>>
>>> Nope, the name is not misleading. The documentation string is false -- what
>>> I hadn't noticed, btw.
>>>
>>> That function just checks if the executable can be found; it does _not_
>>> call it afterward.
>>
>> You're right, I just fixed the docstring.
>>
>>> On Linux and Mac OS, it just calls "which + <program name>", no more... On
>>> Windows, it simply fails immediately (even if the program could be found).
>>
>> If there is an equivalent of `which' on windows let me know,
>
> Not that I know, reason why I (must) have Cygwin...
>
>> we can generalize this function.
>
> Why not replacing it simply by `executable-find': I don't see what it adds to
> it?  I would not say so if it was some upper abstraction, but I do feel
> they're simply the same.
>
> If not, the opposite should be done: replacing the 10 calls to
> `executable-find' by calls to `org-program-exists'...
>
> Best regards,
>   Seb

IIRC on Mac OS `which' is not guaranteed to work anyway, since by default
the `which database' is not instantiated or maintained. I had to kick that
off manually here to have use of `which'.

Best, Martyn