4 ms·
This sounds like a similar idea to JetBrains' MPS: http://www.jetbrains.com/mps/ http://www.jetbrains.com/mps/ The idea with that was that you could provide a
by vilya 13y ago
This sounds like a similar idea to JetBrains' MPS:
http://www.jetbrains.com/mps/ http://www.jetbrains.com/mps/
The idea with that was that you could provide a structured description of a mini-language and it would be sufficient to generate not only a parser, but also a syntax-highlighting IDE with smart code completion, debugging and other neat features. It looks like they're still developing it too, which is a nice surprise: back when I was still interested in it, it never seemed to have taken off.
- bodski 13y agoMPS sounds more like some kind of equivalent to Xtext, i.e. for ease of producing and and hosting DSLs. Tools like Xtext and MPS actually tie you in to their host environments (Eclipse and IntelliJ respectively). What I took GP to mean, and indeed what Yegge's Grok appears to aim for, is the need for a universal modelling framework 'standard' for languages, tools and runtimes. Some kind of equivalent to LLVM but in the 'other direction' for modelling language semantics instead of code. Once a tool (e.g. editor) implements that standard it is able to 'plug in' to any tooling that also implements the standard. Potentially eliminating huge amounts of duplicated effort for tool makers etc.
- kazagistar 13y agoI am not sure I understand. Is there enough similarity between the semantics of languages that a one-size-fits-all solution is even remotely possible? It seems more likely that it would be something that would not-quite work for every language, and result in worse tooling for the sake of standardization.