An architecture for composing embedded domain-specific languages

Dinkelaker, Tom; Eichberg, Michael; Mezini, Mira

doi:10.1145/1739230.1739237

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several tools deal with the problem of DSL embedding [11], where a host language embeds another language for specific purposes (e.g., SQL or XML literals). For instance, Metafront [5] and Metaborg [6] (part of the Stratego/XT toolset) are tools designed to perform syntactic transformation between programming languages typically to extend a host programming language with an embedded DSL.…”

Section: Related Work and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neverlang 2 – Componentised Language Development for the JVM

Cazzola

Vacchi

2013

Software Composition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Traditional compiler development is non-modular. Although syntax extension and DSL embedding is making its way back in modern language design and implementation, componentisation in compiler construction is still an overlooked matter. Neverlang is a language development framework that emphasises modularity and code reuse. Neverlang makes extension, restriction and feature sharing easier, by letting developers define language components in distinct, independent units, that can be compiled independently and shared across different language implementations, even in their compiled form. The semantics of the implemented languages can be specified using any JVM-supported language. In this paper we will present the architecture and implementation of Neverlang 2, by the help of an example inspired by mobile devices and context-dependent behaviour. The Neverlang framework is already being employed successfully in real-world environments.

show abstract

Section: Related Work and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neverlang 2 – Componentised Language Development for the JVM

Cazzola

Vacchi

2013

Software Composition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For precise scoping, we will make use of the concept of scoping strategies [8]. For aspects, we will use domain-specific join points to enable composing aspects in policies written in DSLs [3]. For multiple paradigms, users can load a new paradigm with a special syntax [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy languages require the same composition mechanisms as programming languages

Dinkelaker

Hauke

2011

Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Free Composition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current policy languages come with a monolithic syntax and support only a limited set of security formalisms. Thus, contemporary policies can only inadequately prescribe the correct behavior of a distributed business application w.r.t. different views, such as usage control, safety properties, or governance. To support composing policies that involve multiple views, we propose to include well-established composability mechanisms into policy languages. In this paper, we propose an extensible security DSL that composes multiple mechanisms-namely inheritance, scoping, aspects, and different paradigms-into one composite policy language.

show abstract

“…Like polymorphic embedding of DSLs [16], Polymorphic Identifiers allow a single syntax to be used with multiple, pluggable semantic interpretations permitting composition of functionality [6]. However, Polymorphic Identifiers are applicable to general purpose programming languages, not just DSLs, while at the same time restricting their focus to the identifiers used.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polymorphic identifiers

Weiher

Hirschfeld

2013

Proceedings of the 9th Symposium on Dynamic Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In object-oriented programming, polymorphic dispatch of operations decouples clients from specific providers of services and allows implementations to be modified or substituted without affecting clients.The Uniform Access Principle (UAP) tries to extend these qualities to resource access by demanding that access to state be indistinguishable from access to operations. Despite language features supporting the UAP, the overall goal of substitutability has not been achieved for either alternative resources such as keyed storage, files or web pages, or for alternate access mechanisms: specific kinds of resources are bound to specific access mechanisms and vice versa. Changing storage or access patterns either requires changes to both clients and service providers and trying to maintain the UAP imposes significant penalties in terms of code-duplication and/or performance overhead.We propose introducing first class identifiers as polymorphic names for storage locations to solve these problems. With these Polymorphic Identifiers, we show that we can provide uniform access to a wide variety of resource types as well as storage and access mechanisms, whether parametrized or direct, without affecting client code, without causing code duplication or significant performance penalties.

show abstract

An architecture for composing embedded domain-specific languages

Cited by 16 publications

References 40 publications

Neverlang 2 – Componentised Language Development for the JVM

Neverlang 2 – Componentised Language Development for the JVM

Policy languages require the same composition mechanisms as programming languages

Polymorphic identifiers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About