Extensible Debugger Framework for Extensible Languages

Pavletic, Domenik; Voelter, Markus; Raza, Syed Aoun; Kolb, Bernd; Kehrer, Timo

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19584-1_3

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Still for grammar-based compiled DSLs, Lindeman et al [32] proposes a similar approach were the source DSL program is instrumented with debug information. In the context of extensible languages, Pavletic et al [33] proposes a framework to define and extend debuggers. Das et al [34] describe a framework to monitor at the domain-level the execution of models that were compiled to code, with a strong focus on UML-RT.…”

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain-Level Observation and Control for Compiled Executable DSLs

Bousse

Wimmer

2019

2019 ACM/IEEE 22nd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executable Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) are commonly defined with either operational semantics (i.e., interpretation) or translational semantics (i.e., compilation). An interpreted DSL relies on domain concepts to specify the possible execution states and steps, which enables the observation and control of executions using the very same domain concepts. In contrast, a compiled DSL relies on a transformation to an arbitrarily different target language. This creates a conceptual gap, where the execution can only be observed and controlled through target domain concepts, to the detriment of experts or tools that only understand the source domain. To address this problem, we propose a language engineering architecture for compiled DSLs that enables the observation and control of executions using source domain concepts. The architecture requires the definition of the source domain execution steps and states, along with a feedback manager that translates steps and states of the target domain back to the source domain. We evaluate the architecture with two different compiled DSLs, and show that it does enable domain-level observation and control while increasing execution time by 2× in the worst observed case.

show abstract

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain-Level Observation and Control for Compiled Executable DSLs

Bousse

Wimmer

2019

2019 ACM/IEEE 22nd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advantages of debugging at the model-level have been discussed in the literature, e.g. in [37]. Existing approaches mainly focus on debugger frameworks for dedicated domain-specific languages and are not applicable to mainstream Java programs.…”

Section: Visual Debuggingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inferring visual contracts from Java programs

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual contracts model the operation of components or services by pre-and post-conditions formalised as graph transformation rules. They provide a precise intuitive notation to support testing, understanding and analysis of software. Their detailed specification of internal data states and transformations, referred to as deep behavioural modelling, is an error-prone activity. In this paper we propose a dynamic approach to reverse engineering visual contracts from Java based on tracing the execution of Java operations. The resulting contracts give an accurate description of the observed object transformations, their effects and preconditions in terms of object structures, parameter and attribute values, and their generalised specification by universally quantified (multi) objects, patterns, and invariants. While this paper focusses on the fundamental technique rather than a particular application, we explore potential uses in our evaluation, including in program understanding, review of test reports and debugging.

show abstract

“…However, MPS does not specifically support the development of debuggers for languages that support modular language extensions. To address this shortcoming, we have developed our own debugger framework for extensible languages as part of mbeddr [65]. It works by running a debugger (typically gdb in case of mbeddr C) on the generated code.…”

Section: Rq3: Mechanisms For Managing Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons learned from developing mbeddr: a case study in language engineering with MPS

Voelter¹,

Kolb²,

Szabó

et al. 2017

Softw Syst Model

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language workbenches are touted as a promising technology to engineer languages for use in a wide range of domains, from programming to science to business. However, not many real-world case studies exist that evaluate the suitability of language workbench technology for this task. This paper contains such a case study. In particular, we evaluate the development of mbeddr, a collection of integrated languages and language extensions built with the Jetbrains MPS language workbench. mbeddr consists of 81 languages, with their IDE support, 34 of them C extensions. The mbeddr languages use a wide variety of notations-textual, tabular, symbolic and graphical-and the C extensions are modular; new extensions can be added without changing the existing implementation of C. mbeddr's development has spanned 10 person years so far, and the tool is used in practice and continues to be developed. This makes mbeddr a meaningful case study of nontrivial size and complexity. The evaluation is centered around five research questions: language modularity, notational freedom and projectional editing, mechanisms for managing complexity, performance and scalability issues and the consequences for the development process. We draw generally positive conclusions; language engineering with MPS is ready for real-world use. However, we also identify a number of areas for improvement in the state of the art in language engineering in general, and in MPS in particular.

show abstract

Extensible Debugger Framework for Extensible Languages

Cited by 12 publications

References 14 publications

Domain-Level Observation and Control for Compiled Executable DSLs

Domain-Level Observation and Control for Compiled Executable DSLs

Inferring visual contracts from Java programs

Lessons learned from developing mbeddr: a case study in language engineering with MPS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About