TI1220 Lecture 14: Domain-Specific Languages

TI1220 2012-2013
Concepts of Programming Languages
Eelco Visser / TU Delft
Lecture 14: Domain-Speciﬁc Languages

Syntax and Semantics
Names, Bindings, and Scopes
Storage
Data Types
Functional Programming
First-class Functions
Polymorphism
Type Parameterization
Parsing and Interpretation
Data Abstraction / Modular Programming
Functional Programming Redux
Concurrency
Concurrent Programming
Domain-Speciﬁc Languages
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
Basics of
Scala
JavaScript
C

Linguistic Abstraction
Formalizing Design Patterns

Problem
Domain
Solution
Domain
implement
validate
Software Engineering

Software Reuse: Don’t RepeatYourself
software reuse patterns
• copy and paste
• libraries
• frameworks
• service APIs
• design patterns

Linguistic Abstraction
identify pattern
use new abstraction
language A language B
design abstraction

From Instructions to Expressions
mov &a, &c
add &b, &c
mov &a, &t1
sub &b, &t1
and &t1,&c
Source: http://sites.google.com/site/arch1utep/home/course_outline/translating-complex-expressions-into-assembly-language-using-expression-trees
c = a
c += b
t1 = a
t1 -= b
c &= t1
c = (a + b) & (a - b)

From Calling Conventions to Procedures
calc:
push eBP ; save old frame pointer
mov eBP,eSP ; get new frame pointer
sub eSP,localsize ; reserve place for locals
.
. ; perform calculations, leave result in AX
.
mov eSP,eBP ; free space for locals
pop eBP ; restore old frame pointer
ret paramsize ; free parameter space and return
f(e1,e2,...,en)
push eAX ; pass some register result
push byte[eBP+20] ; pass some memory variable (FASM/TASM syntax)
push 3 ; pass some constant
call calc ; the returned result is now in eAX
f(x) { ... }
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calling_convention

A structure is a collection of one or more variables, possibly of different types,
grouped together under a single name for convenient handling. (Structures are
called ``records'' in some languages, notably Pascal.)
struct point {
int x;
int y;
};
member
structure tag
Structures in C:Abstract from Memory Layout

Malloc/Free to Automatic Memory Management
/* Allocate space for an array with ten elements of type int. */
int *ptr = (int*)malloc(10 * sizeof (int));
if (ptr == NULL) {
/* Memory could not be allocated, the program
should handle the error here as appropriate. */
} else {
/* Allocation succeeded. Do something. */
free(ptr); /* We are done with the int objects,
and free the associated pointer. */
ptr = NULL; /* The pointer must not be used again,
unless re-assigned to using malloc again. */
}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malloc
int [] = new int[10];
/* use it; gc will clean up (hopefully) */

typedef struct Base {
void* (**vtable)();
int x;
} Base;
void (*Base_Vtable[])() = { &Base_print };
Base* newBase(int v) {
Base* obj = (Base*)malloc(sizeof(Base));
obj->vtable = Base_Vtable;
obj->x = v;
return obj;
}
void print(Base* obj) {
obj->vtable[0](obj);
}
class Base {
Integer x;
public Base(Integer v) {
x = v;
}
public void print() {
System.out.println("Base: " + x);
}
}
class Child extends Base {
Integer y;
public Child(Integer v1, Integer v2) {
super(v1);
y = v2;
}
public void print() {
System.out.println("Child: (" + x + "," + y + ")");
}
}
Dynamic Dispatch

Polymorphic Higher-Order Functions
def map[A,B](f: A => B, xs: List[A]): List[B] = {
xs match{
case Nil() => Nil()
case Cons(y, ys) => Cons(f(y), map(f, ys))
}
}
def incList(xs: IntList): IntList =
xs match {
case Nil() => Nil()
case Cons(y, ys) => Cons(y + 1, incList(ys))
}

Abstractions in Programming Languages
❖ Structured control-ﬂow
★ if-then-else, while
❖ Procedural abstraction
★ procedures, ﬁrst-class functions (closures)
❖ Memory management
★ garbage collection
❖ Data abstraction
★ abstract data types, objects
❖ Modules
★ inheritance, traits, mixins

“A programming language is low level when its
programs require attention to the irrelevant”
Alan J. Perlis. Epigrams on Programming. SIGPLAN Notices, 17(9):7-13, 1982.

Do HLLs eliminate all irrelevant details?
What about
❖ data persistence
❖ data services
❖ concurrency
❖ distribution
❖ access control
❖ data invariants
❖ workﬂow
❖ ...

Do HLLs eliminate all irrelevant details?
What about
❖ data persistence
❖ data services
❖ concurrency
❖ distribution
❖ access control
❖ data invariants
❖ workﬂow
❖ ...
many of these
concerns require
programmatic
encodings

What is the Next Level of
Abstraction?
Problem
Domain
HLL Machine

Domain-Speciﬁc Languages
Problem
Domain
HLL MachineDSL

Example: Encoding Units
compiler
computerinput
input distance : Float;
input duration : Float;
output speed : Float := duration / distance;
output

Example: Encoding Units
compiler
computerinput
error
wrong output

Impact of Software Errors
compiler
computer
error
Mars Climate Orbiter
Unit mismatch: Orbiter
variables in Newtons,
Ground control software in
Pound-force.
Damage: ~350 M$
wrong output

Example: Explicit Representation of Units
computer
input distance : Meter;
input duration : Second;
output speed : Meter/Second := duration / distance;
compiler
formalize knowledge of application area (domain) in language
error

DSLs Provide Domain-Speciﬁc ...
Abstractions
★ directly represent domain concepts
Concrete syntax
★ natural notation
Optimization
★ based on domain assumptions
Error checking
★ report errors in terms of domain concepts
Tool support
★ interpreter, compiler, code generator, IDE

Internal DSL
Library in HLL
★ Haskell, Scala, Ruby, ...
★ API is language
★ language features for ‘linguistic abstraction’
Advantages
★ host language = implementation language
Disadvantages
★ host language = implementation language (encoding)
★ no portability
★ no domain-speciﬁc errors, analysis, optimization

External DSL
Dedicated language
★ independent of host/target language (portable)
★ implementation with interpreter or compiler
Advantages
★ language tuned to domain
★ domain-speciﬁc errors, analysis, optimizations
Disadvantages
★ cost of learning new language
★ cost of maintaining language

Example DSLs (1)
Spreadsheet
★ formulas, macros
Querying
★ SQL, XQuery, XPath
Graph layout
★ GraphViz
Web
★ HTML, CSS, RSS, XML, XSLT
★ Ruby/Rails, JSP, ASP, JSF, WebDSL

Example DSLs (2)
Games
★ Lua, UnrealScript
Modeling
★ UML, OCL, QVT
Language engineering
★ YACC, LEX, RegExp, ANTLR, SDF
★ TXL, ASF+SDF, Stratego

Example: Linguistic Integration in
WebDSL

browser server database
web app
Web Programming

browser server database
Java SQL
HTML,
JS, CSS
Web Programming = Distributed Programming

Concerns in Web
Programming
Data Persistence
Access Control
Injection Attacks
Search
XSS
DataValidation
Data Binding
Routing
... ...

Zef Hemel, Danny M. Groenewegen, Lennart C. L. Kats, EelcoVisser.
Static consistency checking of web applications with
WebDSL. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 46(2):150-182, 2011.
Late Failure Detection in Web Applications

Complexity in Web Programming:
Multiple Languages x Multiple Concerns
Consistency not statically checked

EelcoVisser. WebDSL: A Case Study in Domain-Speciﬁc Language Engineering. In
Ralf Lämmel, JoostVisser, João Saraiva, editors, Generative and Transformational Techniques in
Software Engineering II, International Summer School, GTTSE 2007.Volume 5235 of Lecture Notes
in Computer Science, pages 291-373, Springer, Braga, Portugal, 2007.
Separation of Concerns & Linguistic Integration

http://eelcovisser.org/blog/post/42/dsl-engineering
“http://”
+ “eelcovisser.org” // host domain
+ “blog” // application name
+ “post” // page
+ “42” // identity
+ “dsl-engineering” // title

page blog(b: Blog, index: Int) {
main(b){
for(p: Post in b.recentPosts(index,5)) {
section{
header{ navigate post(p) { output(p.title) } }
par{ output(p.content) }
par{ output(p.created.format("MMMM d, yyyy")) }
}
}
}
page post(p: Post) { ... }
Statically checked navigation

entity Blog {
key :: String (id)
title :: String (name)
posts -> Set<Post> (inverse=Post.blog)
function recentPosts(index: Int, n: Int): List<Post> {
var i := max(1,index) - 1;
return [p | p: Post in posts
order by p.created desc
limit n offset i*n].list();
}
}
entity Post {
key :: String (id)
title :: String (name, searchable)
content :: WikiText (searchable)
blog -> Blog
}
Persistent Data Models
Generation of queries: no injection attacks

entity Assignment {
key :: String (id)
title :: String (name, searchable)
shortTitle :: String
description :: WikiText (searchable)
course -> CourseEdition (searchable)
weight :: Float (default=1.0)
deadline :: DateTime (default=null)
// ...
}
page assignment(assign: Assignment, tab: String) {
main{
progress(assign, tab)
pageHeader{
output(assign.title)
breadcrumbs(assign)
}
// ...
}
}
Persistent variables in WebDSL
http://department.st.ewi.tudelft.nl/weblab/assignment/752
objects are automatically persisted in database
1
2
3

page post(p: Post) { ... }
page editpost(p: Post) {
action save() { return blog(p); }
main(p.blog){
form{
formEntry("Title"){
input(p.title) }
formEntry("Content") {
input(p.content) }
formEntry("Posted") {
input(p.created) }
submit save() { "Save" }
}
}
}
Forms & Data Binding
No separate controller!

access control rules
principal is User
with credentials username, password
rule page blog(b: Blog, index: Int) {
true
}
rule page post(p: Post) {
p.public || p.author == principal
}
rule page editpost(p: Post) {
principal == p.author
}
extend entity User {
password :: Secret
}
extend entity Blog {
owner -> User
}
extend entity Post {
public :: Bool
}
Declarative Access Control Rules

Linguistically Integrated
Persistent data model
Logic
Templates (UI, Email, Service)
Data binding
Access control
Data validation
Faceted search
Collaborative ﬁltering

DSL Summary
software reuse through linguistic abstraction
• capture understanding of design patterns in language concepts
• abstract from accidental complexity
• program in terms of domain concepts
• automatically generate implementation

When to Use/Create DSLs?
Hierarchy of abstractions
• first understand how to program it
• make variations by copy, paste, adapt
• (avoid over-engineering)
• make library of frequently used patterns
• find existing (internal) DSLs for the domain
Time for a DSL?
• large class of applications using same design patterns
• design patterns cannot be captured in PL
• lack of checking / optimization for DSL abstractions

object ExpParser extends JavaTokenParsers with PackratParsers {
lazy val exp: PackratParser[Exp] =
(exp <~ "+") ~ exp1 ^^ { case lhs~rhs => Add(lhs, rhs) } |
exp1
lazy val exp1: PackratParser[Exp] =
(exp1 ~ exp0) ^^ { case lhs~rhs => App(lhs, rhs) } |
exp0
lazy val exp0: PackratParser[Exp] =
number | identifier | function | letBinding |
"(" ~> exp <~ ")"
// ...
def parse(text: String) = parseAll(exp, text)
}
syntax through parsers

sealed abstract class Value
case class numV(n: Int) extends Value
case class closureV(param: Symbol, body: Exp, env: Env)
extends Value
def eval(exp: Exp, env: Env): Value = exp match {
case Num(v) => numV(v)
case Add(l, r) => plus(eval(l, env), eval(r, env))
case Id(name) => lookup(name, env)
case Let(name, e1, e2) =>
eval(e2, bind(name, eval(e1, env), env))
case Fun(name, body) => closureV(name, body, env)
case App(fun, arg) => eval(fun, env) match {
case closureV(name, body, env2) =>
eval(body, bind(name, eval(arg, env), env2))
case _ => sys.error("Closure expected")
}
}
semantics through interpreter

Traditional Compilers
ls
Course.java

ls
Course.java
javac -verbose Course.java
[parsing started Course.java]
[parsing completed 8ms]
[loading java/lang/Object.class(java/lang:Object.class)]
[checking university.Course]
[wrote Course.class]
[total 411ms]

ls
Course.java
javac -verbose Course.java
[parsing started Course.java]
[parsing completed 8ms]
[loading java/lang/Object.class(java/lang:Object.class)]
[checking university.Course]
[wrote Course.class]
[total 411ms]
ls
Course.class Course.java

Language Processors
syntax analysis
• parsing
• AST construction
static analysis
• name analysis
• type analysis
semantics
• generation
• interpretation

Integrated Development Environments (IDE)

Modern Compilers in IDEs
syntactic editor services
• syntax checking
• syntax highlighting
• outline view
• code folding
• bracket matching
semantic editor services
• error checking
• reference resolving
• hover help
• content completion
• refactoring

Eclipse Platform
runtime platform
• composition
• integration
development platform
• complex APIs
• abstractions for Eclipse IDEs
• concepts: editors, views, label provider, label provider
factory, …
• tedious, boring, frustrating

Spoofax Language Workbench
declarative meta-languages
• syntax definition
• editor services
• term rewriting
implementation
• generic integration into Eclipse and IMP
• compilation & interpretation of language definitions
agile
• Spoofax & IDE under development in same Eclipse instance
• support for test-driven development

A Taste of Language Engineering
with Spoofax
• abstract syntax trees
• declarative syntax definition
• name binding and scope
• transformation by term rewriting

EnFun: Entities with Functions
module blog
entity String {
function plus(that:String): String
}
entity Bool { }
entity Set<T> {
function add(x: T)
function remove(x: T)
function member(x: T): Bool
}
entity Blog {
posts : Set<Post>
function newPost(): Post {
var p : Post := Post.new();
posts.add(p);
}
}
entity Post {
title : String
}

Signature & Terms
constructors
Module : ID * List(Definition) -> Module
Imports : ID -> Definition
Module(
"application"
, [Imports("library"),
Imports("users"),
Imports("frontend")]
)

Entities & Properties
constructors
Entity : ID * List(Property) -> Definition
Type : ID -> Type
New : Type -> Exp
constructors
Property : ID * Type -> Property
This : Exp
PropAccess : Exp * ID -> Exp
Module("users"
, [ Imports("library")
, Entity("User"
, [ Property("email", Type("String"))
, Property("password", Type("String"))
, Property("isAdmin", Type("Bool"))])])

Parsing: From Text to Structure

Declarative Syntax Deﬁnition
Entity("User", [
Property("first", Type("String")),
Property("last", Type("String"))
])
signature
constructors
Type : ID -> Type

entity User {
first : String
last : String
}
Entity("User", [
])
signature
constructors
Type : ID -> Type

entity User {
first : String
last : String
}
Entity("User", [
])
signature
constructors
Type : ID -> Type
context-free syntax
"entity" ID "{" Property* "}" -> Definition {"Entity"}
ID -> Type {"Type"}
ID ":" Type -> Property {"Property"}

Prototyping Syntax Deﬁnition

Context-free Syntax
constructors
True : Exp
False : Exp
Not : Exp -> Exp
And : Exp * Exp -> Exp
Or : Exp * Exp -> Exp
context-free syntax
"true" -> Exp {"True"}
"false" -> Exp {"False"}
"!" Exp -> Exp {"Not"}
Exp "&&" Exp -> Exp {"And"}
Exp "||" Exp -> Exp {"Or"}

Lexical Syntax
constructors
True : Exp
False : Exp
Not : Exp -> Exp
context-free syntax
lexical syntax
[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9]* -> ID
"-"? [0-9]+ -> INT
[ tnr] -> LAYOUT
constructors
: String -> ID
: String -> INT
scannerless generalized (LR) parsing
form of tokens (words, lexemes)

Ambiguity
constructors
True : Exp
False : Exp
Not : Exp -> Exp
context-free syntax
isPublic || isDraft && (author == principal())

Ambiguity
constructors
True : Exp
False : Exp
Not : Exp -> Exp
context-free syntax
amb([
And(Or(Var("isPublic"), Var("isDraft")),
Eq(Var("author"), ThisCall("principal", []))),
Or(Var("isPublic"),
And(Var("isDraft"), Eq(Var("author"), ThisCall("principal", []))))
])

Disambiguation by Encoding Precedence
constructors
True : Exp
False : Exp
Not : Exp -> Exp
context-free syntax
context-free syntax
"(" Exp ")" -> Exp0 {bracket}
"true" -> Exp0 {"True"}
"false" -> Exp0 {"False"}
Exp0 -> Exp1
"!" Exp0 -> Exp1 {"Not"}
Exp1 -> Exp2
Exp1 "&&" Exp2 -> Exp2 {"And"}
Exp2 -> Exp3
Exp2 "||" Exp3 -> Exp3 {"Or"}

Declarative Disambiguation
context-free syntax
Exp "&&" Exp -> Exp {"And", left}
Exp "||" Exp -> Exp {"Or", left}
"(" Exp ")" -> Exp {bracket}
context-free priorities
{left: Exp.Not} >
{left: Exp.Mul} >
{left: Exp.Plus Exp.Minus} >
{left: Exp.And} >
{non-assoc: Exp.Eq Exp.Lt Exp.Gt Exp.Leq Exp.Geq}
Or(Var("isPublic"),
And(Var("isDraft"),
Eq(Var("author"), ThisCall("principal", []))))

Deﬁnitions and References
module test
entity String { }
entity User {
first : String
last : String
}
deﬁnition
reference

From Tree to Graph
Module(
"test"
, [ Entity("String", [])
, Entity(
"User"
, [ Property("first", )
, Property("last", )
]
)
]
)

NaBL: Name Binding Language
module names
imports
include/Cam
namespaces Type Property Function Variable
rules
Entity(name, None(), None(), _):
defines Type name of type Type(name, [])
scopes Type, Function, Property, Variable
Type(name, _):
refers to Type name

Transformation by Strategic Rewriting
rules
desugar:
Plus(e1, e2) -> MethCall(e1, "plus", [e2])
desugar:
Or(e1, e2) -> MethCall(e1, "or", [e2])
desugar :
VarDeclInit(x, t, e) ->
Seq([VarDecl(x, t),
Assign(Var(x), e)])
strategies
desugar-all = topdown(repeat(desugar))

Return-Lifting Applied
function fact(n: Int): Int {
var res: Int;
if(n == 0) {
res := 1;
} else {
res := this * fact(n - 1);
}
return res;
}
function fact(n: Int): Int {
if(n == 0) {
return 1;
} else {
return this * fact(n - 1);
}
}

Return-Lifting Rules
rules
lift-return-all =
alltd(lift-return; normalize-all)
lift-return :
FunDef(x, arg*, Some(t), stat1*) ->
FunDef(x, arg*, Some(t), Seq([
VarDecl(y, t),
Seq(stat2*),
Return(Var(y))
]))
where y := <new>;
stat2* := <alltd(replace-return(|y))> stat1*
replace-return(|y) :
Return(e) -> Assign(y, e)

Language Engineering Summary
apply linguistic abstraction to language engineering
• declarative languages for language definition
• automatic derivation of efficient compilers
• automatic derivation of IDEs

error
Problem: Correctness of Language Deﬁnitions
computer
compiler
Can we
trust the
compiler?
wrong outputinput
program
type soundness: well-typed programs don’t go wrong

compiler
error
Challenge:AutomaticVeriﬁcation of Correctness
computer
compiler
wrong output
program
type soundness: well-typed programs don’t go wrong
type
checker
code
generator
input

Correctness
Proof
Language Workbench
State-of-the-Art: Language Engineering
Syntax
Checker
Name
Resolver
Type
Checker
Code
Generator
focus on implementation; not suitable for veriﬁcation
Compiler
Editor
(IDE)
Tests

Formal Language Speciﬁcation
State-of-the-Art: Semantics Engineering
Abstract
Syntax
Type
System
Dynamic
Semantics
Transforms
focus on (only semi-automatic) veriﬁcation; not suitable for implementation
Correctness
Proof
TestsCompiler
Editor
(IDE)

Declarative Language Definition
My Approach: Multi-Purpose Language Definitions
Syntax
Definition
Name
Binding
Type
System
Dynamic
Semantics
Transforms
Compiler
Editor
(IDE)
Correctness
Proof
Tests
bridging the gap between language engineering and semantics engineering

Software Development on the Web
revisiting the architecture of the IDE

Material for exam
Slides from lectures
Tutorial exercises
Graded assignments
Sebesta: Chapters 1-13, 15
Programming in Scala: Chapters 1, 4-16, 19, 32-33
K&R C: Chapters 1-6
JavaScript Good Parts: Chapters 1-4

Content of exam
10% multiple choice questions
about concepts
50% Scala programming
(functional programming)
20% C programming
(structures and pointers)
20% JavaScript programming
(objects and prototypes)

Registration for Exam is Required
http://department.st.ewi.tudelft.nl/weblab/assignment/761 -> your submission

TI1220 Lecture 14: Domain-Specific Languages

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (14)

Ähnlich wie TI1220 Lecture 14: Domain-Specific Languages

Ähnlich wie TI1220 Lecture 14: Domain-Specific Languages (20)

Mehr von Eelco Visser

Mehr von Eelco Visser (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

TI1220 Lecture 14: Domain-Specific Languages