research-article

Declaratively defining domain-specific language debuggers

Authors:

Ricky T. Lindeman,

Lennart C.L. Kats,

Eelco VisserAuthors Info & Claims

GPCE '11: Proceedings of the 10th ACM international conference on Generative programming and component engineering

Pages 127 - 136

https://doi.org/10.1145/2047862.2047885

Published: 22 October 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Tool support is vital to the effectiveness of domain-specific languages. With language workbenches, domain-specific languages and their tool support can be generated from a combined, high-level specification. This paper shows how such a specification can be extended to describe a debugger for a language. To realize this, we introduce a meta-language for coordinating the debugger that abstracts over the complexity of writing a debugger by hand. We describe the implementation of a language-parametric infrastructure for debuggers that can be instantiated based on this specification. The approach is implemented in the Spoofax language workbench and validated through realistic case studies with the Stratego transformation language and the WebDSL web programming language.

References

[1]

M. Auguston. Building program behavior models. In ECAI Workshop on Spatial and Temporal Reasoning, pages 19--26, 2007.

[2]

M. Bravenboer, K. T. Kalleberg, R. Vermaas, and E. Visser. Stratego/XT 0.17. A language and toolset for program transformation. Science of Computer Programming, 72 (1-2): 52--70, 2008.

Digital Library

[3]

P. Charles, R. M. Fuhrer, S. M. S. Jr., E. Duesterwald, and J. Vinju. Accelerating the creation of customized, language-specific IDEs in eclipse. In S. Arora and G. T. Leavens, editors, Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2009, 2009.

Digital Library

[4]

J. C. Cleaveland. Building application generators. Softw., 5 (4), 1988.

Digital Library

[5]

S. Efftinge and M. Voelter. oAW xText: A framework for textual DSLs. In Workshop on Modeling Symposium at Eclipse Summit, 2006.

[6]

R. E. Faith, L. S. Nyland, and J. Prins. Khepera: A system for rapid implementation of domain specific languages. In Conference on Domain-Specific Languages, October 15-17, 1997, Santa Barbara, California, USA. USENIX, 1997.

Digital Library

[7]

M. Fowler. Language workbenches: The killer-app for domain specific languages? http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/languageWorkbench.html, 2005.

[8]

M. Fowler. Domain-Specific Languages. Addison Wesley, 2011.

Digital Library

[9]

D. M. Groenewegen, Z. Hemel, and E. Visser. Separation of concerns and linguistic integration in WebDSL. Software, 27 (5), September/October 2010.

Digital Library

[10]

Z. Hemel and E. Visser. Declaratively programming the mobile web with mobl. In Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2011. ACM, 2011.

Digital Library

[11]

P. Henriques, M. Pereira, M. Mernik, M. Lenic, J. Gray, and H. Wu. Automatic generation of language-based tools using the LISA system. Software, IEE Proceedings -, 152 (2): 54--69, april 2005.

[12]

L. C. L. Kats and E. Visser. The Spoofax language workbench: rules for declarative specification of languages and IDEs. In W. R. Cook, S. Clarke, and M. C. Rinard, editors, Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2010, pages 444--463. ACM, 2010.

Digital Library

[13]

L. C. L. Kats, E. Visser, and G. Wachsmuth. Pure and declarative syntax definition: paradise lost and regained. In W. R. Cook, S. Clarke, and M. C. Rinard, editors, Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2010, pages 918--932. ACM, 2010.

Digital Library

[14]

P. Klint. A meta-environment for generating programming environments. Transactions on Software Engineering Methodology, 2 (2): 176--201, 1993.

Digital Library

[15]

T. Kosar, N. Oliveira, M. Mernik, V. Pereira, M. Crepinsek, C. Da, and R. Henriques. Comparing general-purpose and domain-specific languages: An empirical study. Computer Science and Information Systems, 7 (2): 247--264, 2010.

[16]

H. Krahn, B. Rumpe, and S. Völkel. Monticore: Modular development of textual domain specific languages. In R. F. Paige and B. Meyer, editors, Objects, Components, Models and Patterns, TOOLS EUROPE 2008, volume 11 of LNBIP, pages 297--315. Springer, 2008.

[17]

R. Mannadiar and H. Vangheluwe. Debugging in domain-specific modelling. In Software language engineering, SLE'10, pages 276--285. Springer-Verlag, 2011.

Digital Library

[18]

M. Mernik, J. Heering, and A. M. Sloane. When and how to develop domain-specific languages. Computing Surveys, 37 (4): 316--344, 2005.

Digital Library

[19]

D. Rebernak, M. Mernik, H. Wu, and J. G. Gray. Domain-specific aspect languages for modularising crosscutting concerns in grammars. IEE Proceedings - Software, 3 (3): 184--200, 2009.

[20]

Y. Smaragdakis and D. Batory. Application generators. Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, 2000.

[21]

M. van den Brand, B. Cornelissen, P. A. Olivier, and J. J. Vinju. TIDE: A generic debugging framework - tool demonstration. ENTCS, 141 (4): 161--165, 2005.

Digital Library

[22]

I. Vessey. Toward a theory of computer program bugs: An empirical test. Int. Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 30 (1): 23--46, 1989.

Digital Library

[23]

E. Visser. Syntax Definition for Language Prototyping. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, September 1997.

[24]

E. Visser. WebDSL: A case study in domain-specific language engineering. In R. Lämmel, J. Visser, and J. Saraiva, editors, Generative and Transformational Techniques in Software Engineering II, Int. Summer School, GTTSE 2007, volume 5235 of LNCS, pages 291--373. Springer, 2007.

Digital Library

[25]

M. Voelter and K. Solomatov. Language modularization and composition with projectional language workbenches illustrated with MPS. In M. van den Brand, B. Malloy, and S. Staab, editors, Software Language Engineering, SLE 2010, LNCS. Springer, 2010.

[26]

D. S. Wile. Supporting the DSL spectrum. CIT. Journal of computing and information technology, 9 (4): 263--287, 2001.

[27]

H. Wu, J. Gray, and M. Mernik. Grammar-driven generation of domain-specific language debuggers. Software: Practice and Experience, 38 (10): 1073--1103, 2008.

Digital Library

Cited By

Weidmann NAnjorin ACheney J(2020)VICToRy: Visual Interactive Consistency Management in Tolerant Rule-based SystemsElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science10.4204/EPTCS.330.1330(1-12)Online publication date: 3-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.330.1
Tijani FCallaghan Rde Villers R(2020)An Investigation into Pre-service Teachers’ Experiences While Transitioning from Scratch Programming to Procedural ProgrammingAfrican Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education10.1080/18117295.2020.1820798(1-13)Online publication date: 7-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2020.1820798
Bousse EWimmer M(2019)Domain-Level Observation and Control for Compiled Executable DSLs2019 ACM/IEEE 22nd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS)10.1109/MODELS.2019.000-6(150-160)Online publication date: Sep-2019
https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS.2019.000-6
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Declaratively defining domain-specific language debuggers
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software verification and validation
      1. Software defect analysis
        Software testing and debugging
  2. Software notations and tools
    1. Compilers
    2. Development frameworks and environments

Recommendations

Declaratively defining domain-specific language debuggers
GCPE '11

Tool support is vital to the effectiveness of domain-specific languages. With language workbenches, domain-specific languages and their tool support can be generated from a combined, high-level specification. This paper shows how such a specification ...
Language extension and composition with language workbenches
OOPSLA '10: Proceedings of the ACM international conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications companion

Domain-specific languages (DSLs) provide high expressive power focused on a particular problem domain. They provide linguistic abstractions and specialized syntax specifically designed for a domain, allowing developers to avoid boilerplate code and low-...
The spoofax language workbench: rules for declarative specification of languages and IDEs
OOPSLA '10

Spoofax is a language workbench for efficient, agile development of textual domain-specific languages with state-of-the-art IDE support. Spoofax integrates language processing techniques for parser generation, meta-programming, and IDE development into ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

GPCE '11: Proceedings of the 10th ACM international conference on Generative programming and component engineering

October 2011

194 pages

ISBN:9781450306898

DOI:10.1145/2047862

General Chair:
Ewen Denney
SGT/NASA Ames, USA
,
Program Chair:
Ulrik Pagh Schultz
University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

ACM SIGPLAN Notices Volume 47, Issue 3
GCPE '11
March 2012
179 pages
ISSN:0362-1340
EISSN:1558-1160
DOI:10.1145/2189751
Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 October 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

GPCE '11

Sponsor:

SIGPLAN

GPCE '11: Generative Programming and Component Engineering

October 22 - 23, 2011

Oregon, Portland, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 56 of 180 submissions, 31%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

16
Total Citations
View Citations
359
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)18
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 10 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Weidmann NAnjorin ACheney J(2020)VICToRy: Visual Interactive Consistency Management in Tolerant Rule-based SystemsElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science10.4204/EPTCS.330.1330(1-12)Online publication date: 3-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.330.1
Tijani FCallaghan Rde Villers R(2020)An Investigation into Pre-service Teachers’ Experiences While Transitioning from Scratch Programming to Procedural ProgrammingAfrican Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education10.1080/18117295.2020.1820798(1-13)Online publication date: 7-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2020.1820798
Bousse EWimmer M(2019)Domain-Level Observation and Control for Compiled Executable DSLs2019 ACM/IEEE 22nd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS)10.1109/MODELS.2019.000-6(150-160)Online publication date: Sep-2019
https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS.2019.000-6
Van Tendeloo YVan Mierlo SVangheluwe H(2019)A Multi-Paradigm Modelling approach to live modellingSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-018-0700-718:5(2821-2842)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-018-0700-7
Mayerhofer TCombemale B(2018)The Tool Generation Challenge for Executable Domain-Specific Modeling LanguagesSoftware Technologies: Applications and Foundations10.1007/978-3-319-74730-9_18(193-199)Online publication date: 23-Jan-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74730-9_18
Li XFlatt MCombemale BMernik MRumpe B(2017)Debugging with domain-specific events via macrosProceedings of the 10th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering10.1145/3136014.3136019(91-102)Online publication date: 23-Oct-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3136014.3136019
Drey ZTeodorov CStorm TBalland EVarro D(2016)Object-oriented design pattern for DSL program monitoringProceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering10.1145/2997364.2997373(70-83)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2997364.2997373
Van De Vanter MMorandat FZendra O(2015)Building debuggers and other toolsProceedings of the 10th Workshop on Implementation, Compilation, Optimization of Object-Oriented Languages, Programs and Systems10.1145/2843915.2843917(1-3)Online publication date: 4-Jul-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2843915.2843917
Pavletic DVoelter MRaza SKolb BKehrer T(2015)Extensible Debugger Framework for Extensible LanguagesReliable Software Technologies – Ada-Europe 201510.1007/978-3-319-19584-1_3(33-49)Online publication date: 9-Jun-2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19584-1_3
Chiş AGîrba TNierstrasz O(2014)The Moldable Debugger: A Framework for Developing Domain-Specific DebuggersSoftware Language Engineering10.1007/978-3-319-11245-9_6(102-121)Online publication date: 2014
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11245-9_6
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents