Editing support for software languages

Barros, Djonathan; Peldszus, Sven; Assunção, Wesley K. G.; Berger, Thorsten

doi:10.1145/3550355.3552452

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study could highlight common strategies to deal with the bias present in these protocols. This differs from [9], where the authors look at which LSP services are implemented by different languages, but do not discuss the changes to the original LSP semantics that were made in order to implement those services. • Finally, it would be interesting to reflect on how to use those protocols to provide domain-specific operations for a broader panel of languages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Suitability of LSP and DAP for Domain-Specific Languages

Enet,

Bousse,

Tisi

et al. 2023

2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) help manage the growing complexity of systems by facilitating their description and execution or simulation via tailored languages. A large part of the development costs of a DSL comes from building the associated tools it requires, such as an editor or a debugger. To reduce these costs, the Language Server Protocol (LSP) and Debug Adapter Protocol (DAP) enable the creation of generic tooling interfaces which rely on standardized services exposed by languages. However, as these protocols have been designed for General Purpose Languages (GPLs), their applicability to DSLs has no yet been extensively studied. In this paper, we analyze both LSP and DAP, with an emphasis regarding their relevance for the development of tooling for DSLs. We provide both a highlevel insight into these protocols, such as a dependency graph of their services, and a more fine-grained qualitative analysis of each service. We show that while some services defined by these two protocols can be provided by any DSL, others make strong assumptions on the concepts that should be part of the considered DSL. Conversely, domain-specific concepts available in some DSLs are not exploitable through these protocols, thus reducing the capabilities of generic tools.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%