Transcript DSL-conf

Trip Report: DSL ‘97
October 15-17, 1997
Santa Barbara CA
AHA!
Natural History of DSLs (I)
• In domain engineering, you analyze a set of
applications for commonalities and
dimensions of variation. Design a DSL to
express each dimension of variation. Then
weave the results together.
• Are these aspects??
• NO!
Examples:
• DB systems:
– schemas/forms/reports
• Distributed Systems:
– functionality/concurrency/communication/cohe
rence/security
Examples
• Cache coherence protocols (Chandra, Larus,
et al)
• Web/voice response systems [Mawl]
(Atkins, Ball, et al)
– service logic/presentation
• 3D animation (Elliott)
– model/presentation
Morals for us
• in order to make progress, we need to have
a domain (a family of applications) to
analyze.
• "C++ data structure programs" isn't specific
enough.
• Who can we collaborate with?
• QoS a good start, but still maybe not
specific enough.
AHA!
Natural History of DSLs (II)
• DSLs start out as "pure embedded" DSLs, ie
libraries embedded in GPLs.
• Turning this into a standalone language
restricts flexibility, BUT
• Now can do better analysis of DSL
programs
• Can reason at domain level instead of hostlanguage level
• Big theme of conference
More Interesting Presentations
• Zephr ASDL -- possibly useful tool
– maybe a good customer, too
• Khepera -- automatically adds debugging
support to transformation systems
• Use postprocessor to give user output in
domain-specific terms (for errors, too)
Simonyi -- Intentional
Programming
• programmer's intention is always in domain
terms
• abstraction object = programmer's intention
• IP: a new habitat for high level abstractions
• program is network of objects (intentions)
• objects know how to display themselves (at
lesser or greater level of detail (?)), how to
compile themselves given info about
context, etc.
Simonyi -- Intentional
Programming (II)
• My summary: like visual programming:
network of objects is primary, textual
representation is secondary. Program by
opening property sheets like Windows 95.
• Gregor's summary: smalltalk/interlisp done
"right" (ie with modern engineering).
Technical question:
• what conventions does system impose on
new primitives? This determines what level
of interoperation is expected/required.
Don Batory -- Genvoca
• type equations aren't functions; they are
specification, like specification of a
protocol stack.
• not right to think of IO or OI evaluation:
the system looks at the protocol stack and
weaves it together.
• He’s waiting for us to send him specs!!
Kiczales -- Aspect-Oriented
Programming
• separation of concerns, modularity is good
• but traditional design captures only part of
system behavior
• can't talk about "emergent entities"
– path of a msg through a system
– dataflows (lifetimes, source/sink of data item)
– control states (concurrency, blocking relations,
stack state)
Minimizing
network
controlling
slot copying
library
library
load
printer
book
user
method invocations
title, author, isbn
printable format
library
Emergent entities
library
printer
book
user
• emerge1 during program execution
– from (possibly non-local) interactions of the components
• are not components
– do not exist explicitly in the component model or code
1 emerge:
to become manifest; to rise from or as if from an enveloping
fluid; come out into view
Aspects
• aspect = modular unit of control over an
emergent entity
• talked at length about "AspectJ", but didn't
mention Crista !?!
Domain Transformations
• Reflection links static and dynamic domains
• other linking transforms: unfolding, CPS,
PE, ...
• like Fourier transform: transforms from
time domain to frequency domain-- what's
local in one is distributed in the other.
Big Problems in AOP/DSL
• understanding these transforms.
• interfaces between different aspect
languages (type checking, etc.)
AHA!
A Foundation for AOP
• Flows, etc are attempt to capture/describe
dynamic behavior
• Think about interpreter:
– can easily capture info about variable
binding/flow, etc.
– so what's implicit in pgm text can be explicit in
interpreter
– pgm text is implicit in interpeter
A Foundation for AOP (II)
• So could easily imagine interpreter with
annotations to collect certain dynamic info
and act on it.
• Semantics!
• Turn into compiler by PE of some sort