Rapidly prototyping implementation infrastructure of domain specific languages

Wang, Qian; Gupta, Gopal

doi:10.1145/1066677.1066998

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our approach, we have incorporated some of the process aspects of maintenance through feedback loops and iterative development. Wang and Gupta [72] present an approach to rapidly adapt the DSL development environment (consisting of components like compiler, interpreter, or debugger) to changes in the respective DSL. In particular, Wang and Gupta express DSL syntax and semantics using Horn logic.…”

Section: Approaches Dealing With Dsl Evolution and Maintenancementioning

confidence: 99%

An approach for the systematic development of domain‐specific languages

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Approaches Dealing With Dsl Evolution and Maintenancementioning

confidence: 99%

An approach for the systematic development of domain‐specific languages

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These observations can be combined with the experience that most languages evolve with time and that especially DSLs go through a rapid prototyping phase at the beginning where language versions are built for practical evaluation (Wang and Gupta, 2005). Therefore, we conclude that the GrammarOptimizer has big potential to save manual effort when it comes to developing DSLs.…”

Section: The Effort Of Creating and Evolving A Language With The Gram...mentioning

confidence: 64%

Supporting Meta-Model-Based Language Evolution and Rapid Prototyping with Automated Grammar Optimization

Zhang

Holtmann

Hebig³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Given a program written in the DSL, the interpreter can be specialized with respect to the program to obtain compiled code [15,12]. Debuggers and profilers can be built by instrumenting the semantic specification [4] With respect to the dual view of a software system as a processor of its input language, once the input language is designed, the software system (language processor) itself can be rapidly developed by specifying the (executable) syntax and semantics of the input language.…”

Section: Rapid Prototyping the Implementation Infrastructure Via Lpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language-based software engineering

Gupta¹

2015

Science of Computer Programming

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Techniques for developing reliable, error free (and these days also secure) software have been a subject of research for a long time. A number of software engineering frameworks have been proposed, from the waterfall model [1] to aspect oriented frameworks [2]. In this short paper we present a language-based framework for software engineering [13]. In the language-based software engineering framework domain experts are the application developers. They program their applications in high level domain specific languages (DSLs). This approach, based on using high level DSLs, results in more robust, reliable and secure software.The task of developing a program to solve a specific problem involves two steps. The first step is to devise a solution procedure to solve the problem. This step requires a domain expert to use his/her domain knowledge, expertise, creativity and mental acumen to devise a solution to the problem. The second step is to code the solution in some executable notation (such as a computer programming language) to obtain a program that can then be run on a computer to solve the problem. In the second step the user is required to map the steps of the solution procedure to constructs of the programming language being used for coding. Both steps are cognitively challenging and require considerable amount of thinking and mental activity. The more we can reduce the amount of mental activity involved in both steps (e.g., via automation), the more reliable the process of software construction will be. Not much can be done about the first step as far as reducing the amount of mental activity is involved, however, a lot can be done for the second step. The amount of mental effort the programmer has to put in the second step depends on the "semantic" gap between the level of abstraction at which the solution procedure has been conceived and the various constructs of the programming language being used. Domain experts usually think at a very high level of abstraction while designing the solution procedures. As a result, the more low-level the programming language, the wider the semantic gap, and the harder the user's task. In contrast, if we had a language that was right at the level of abstraction at which the user thinks, the task of constructing the program would be much easier. A domain specific language indeed makes this possible.Note that for any kind of communication (including between programmers/users and the computer) the notation used for the communication determines how effectively and efficiently that communication can be understood/processed. A new, complex notation may take longer time to learn, but if the notation is carefully designed for the task/domain, then it allows far more complex things to be expressed and understood considerably more easily. It also encourages creativity, since people now have to simply focus on what to say, rather than on how to say it. This in turn affects productivity of the people (and machines) involved. A prime example of this is the position-based decimal notation...

show abstract

Rapidly prototyping implementation infrastructure of domain specific languages

Cited by 8 publications

References 24 publications

An approach for the systematic development of domain‐specific languages

An approach for the systematic development of domain‐specific languages

Supporting Meta-Model-Based Language Evolution and Rapid Prototyping with Automated Grammar Optimization

Language-based software engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About