3 ms·

DSL is more like a generalisation of config files.

mutagen 8y ago
While that is one quite useful application of DSLs, they're certainly used more widely than config files. Care to expand further?
- heavenlyblue 8y ago
  I said "generalisation". You're thinking I mean DSLs in a static way - where they compile to a single static structure that is like a configuration file. I am trying to redefine the term here instead, because it seems more appropriate. Essentially what I am asking here is: where do we set the line between "scripts" and "configuration files"? Because scripts are simply configuration files with a tree-like structure as they represent programs. Scripts "configure the execution paths of your program". A DSL thus is just a configuration file with a set of rules of applying those tree-like structures to each other.
  - elcomet 8y ago
    Scripts are definitely not configuration file. I would say the line is Turing-completeness. For me, DSL are half way between configuration files and scripts. If they are not Turing complete they are configuration languages. If they are, then they are programming language (with a specific use case). And I think that it is usually a bad idea to have configuration files in Turing complete languages (with exceptions, it can certainly be done well).
    - heavenlyblue 8y ago
      >> Scripts are definitely not configuration file. >> I would say the line is Turing-completeness. >> For me, DSL are half way between configuration files and scripts _you_ would say. >> If they are not Turing complete they are configuration languages. If they are, then they are programming language (with a specific use case). Or, you could say that DSLs are what they are: "Domain Specific Languages". Which means that can either be a set of static definitions a-la configuration file, or on another side they can be scripts. All of these definitions fit really well the meaning of "Domain Specific Language".
karmakaze 8y ago
Mose DSLs I encounter started as configs and tend to be inelegant because they're incidental rather than planned languages. I applaud thinking in terms of languages up front and exercising restraint to keep it to the bare minimum.

While that is one quite useful application of DSLs, they're certainly used more widely than config files. Care to expand further?

heavenlyblue 8y ago
I said "generalisation". You're thinking I mean DSLs in a static way - where they compile to a single static structure that is like a configuration file. I am trying to redefine the term here instead, because it seems more appropriate. Essentially what I am asking here is: where do we set the line between "scripts" and "configuration files"? Because scripts are simply configuration files with a tree-like structure as they represent programs. Scripts "configure the execution paths of your program". A DSL thus is just a configuration file with a set of rules of applying those tree-like structures to each other.
- elcomet 8y ago
  Scripts are definitely not configuration file. I would say the line is Turing-completeness. For me, DSL are half way between configuration files and scripts. If they are not Turing complete they are configuration languages. If they are, then they are programming language (with a specific use case). And I think that it is usually a bad idea to have configuration files in Turing complete languages (with exceptions, it can certainly be done well).
  - heavenlyblue 8y ago
    >> Scripts are definitely not configuration file. >> I would say the line is Turing-completeness. >> For me, DSL are half way between configuration files and scripts _you_ would say. >> If they are not Turing complete they are configuration languages. If they are, then they are programming language (with a specific use case). Or, you could say that DSLs are what they are: "Domain Specific Languages". Which means that can either be a set of static definitions a-la configuration file, or on another side they can be scripts. All of these definitions fit really well the meaning of "Domain Specific Language".

karmakaze 8y ago

Mose DSLs I encounter started as configs and tend to be inelegant because they're incidental rather than planned languages. I applaud thinking in terms of languages up front and exercising restraint to keep it to the bare minimum.