Results 1 -
3 of
3
Semantics-Driven DSL Design
- Formal and Practical Aspects of Domain-Specific Languages: Recent Developments. IGI Global
, 2012
"... Convention dictates that the design of a language begins with its syntax. We argue that early emphasis should be placed instead on the identification of general, compositional semantic domains, and that grounding the design process in semantics leads to languages with more consistent and more extens ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 3 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Convention dictates that the design of a language begins with its syntax. We argue that early emphasis should be placed instead on the identification of general, compositional semantic domains, and that grounding the design process in semantics leads to languages with more consistent and more extensible syntax. We demonstrate this semantics-driven design process through the design and implementation of a DSL for defining and manipulating calendars, using Haskell as a metalanguage to support this discussion. We emphasize the importance of compositionality in semantics-driven language design, and describe a set of language operators that support an incremental and modular design process.
Finding Common Ground: Choose, Assert, and Assume
"... At present, the “testing community ” is on good speaking terms, but typically lacks a common language for expressing some computational ideas, even in cases where such a language would be both useful and plausible. In particular, a large body of testing systems define a testing problem in the langua ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
At present, the “testing community ” is on good speaking terms, but typically lacks a common language for expressing some computational ideas, even in cases where such a language would be both useful and plausible. In particular, a large body of testing systems define a testing problem in the language of the system under test, extended with operations for choosing inputs, asserting properties, and constraining the domain of executions considered. While the underlying algorithms used for “testing ” include symbolic execution, explicit-state model checking, machine learning, and“old fashioned”random testing, there seems to be a common core of expressive need. We propose that the dynamic analysis community could benefit from working with some common syntactic (and to some extent semantic) mechanisms for expressing a body of testing problems. Such a shared language would have immediate practical uses and make cross-tool comparisons and research into identifying appropriate tools for different testing activities easier. We also suspect that considering the more abstract testing problem arising from this minimalist common ground could serve as a basis for thinking about the design of usable embedded domain-specific languages for testing and might help identify computational patterns that have escaped the notice of the community.
