Designing Syntax Embeddings and Assimilations for Language Libraries

  • Martin Bravenboer
  • Eelco Visser
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5002)


Language libraries extend regular libraries with domain-specific notation. More precisely, a language library is a combination of a domain-specific language embedded in the general-purpose host language, a regular library implementing the underlying functionality, and an assimilation transformation that maps embedded DSL fragments to host language code. While the basic architecture for realizing language libraries is the same for all applications, there are many design choices to be made in the design of a particular combination of library, guest language syntax, host language, and assimilation. In this paper, we give an overview of the design space for syntax embeddings and assimilations for the realization of language libraries.


Code Fragment Assimilation Strategy Concrete Syntax String Generation Abstract Syntax Tree 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bachrach, J., Playford, K.: The Java syntactic extender (JSE). In: Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 2001), pp. 31–42. ACM, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker, J., Hsieh, W.: Maya: multiple-dispatch syntax extension in java. In: Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 2002), pp. 270–281. ACM, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Batory, D., Lofaso, B., Smaragdakis, Y.: JTS: tools for implementing domain-specific languages. In: International Conference on Software Reuse (ICSR 1998), pp. 143–153. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Begel, A., Graham, S.L.: Language analysis and tools for input stream ambiguities. In: Language Descriptions, Tools and Applications (LDTA 2004). ENTCS, Elsevier, Amsterdam (April 2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brabrand, C., Vanggaard, M., Schwartzbach, M.I.: The metafront system: Extensible parsing and transformation. In: Language Descriptions, Tools and Applications (LDTA 2003), ACM, New York (April 2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bravenboer, M., de Groot, R., Visser, E.: MetaBorg in action: Examples of domain-specific language embedding and assimilation using Stratego/XT. In: Lämmel, R., Saraiva, J., Visser, J. (eds.) GTTSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 4143, pp. 297–311. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bravenboer, M., Dolstra, E., Visser, E.: Preventing injection attacks with syntax embeddings. A host and guest language independent approach. In: Lawall, J. (ed.) Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2007), pp. 3–12. ACM, New York (October 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bravenboer, M., Tanter, E., Visser, E.: Declarative, formal, and extensible syntax definition for AspectJ. A case for scannerless generalized-LR parsing. In: Object-Oriented Programing, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 2006), ACM, New York (October 2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bravenboer, M., van Dam, A., Olmos, K., Visser, E.: Program transformation with scoped dynamic rewrite rules. Fundamenta Informaticae 69(1–2), 123–178 (2006)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bravenboer, M., Vermaas, R., Vinju, J.J., Visser, E.: Generalized type-based disambiguation of meta programs with concrete object syntax. In: Glück, R., Lowry, M. (eds.) GPCE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3676, pp. 157–172. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bravenboer, M., Visser, E.: Concrete syntax for objects. Domain-specific language embedding and assimilation without restrictions. In: Object-Oriented Programing, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 2004), pp. 365–383. ACM, New York (October 2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Earley, J.: An efficient context-free parsing algorithm. Communications of the ACM 13(2), 94–102 (1970)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ford, B.: Packrat parsing: simple, powerful, lazy, linear time, functional pearl. In: International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP 2002), pp. 36–47. ACM, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grimm, R.: Better extensibility through modular syntax. In: Cook, W.R. (ed.) Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 2006), ACM, New York (June 2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J.: L.H.R., Jr., Ruf, E.: Macros that reach out and touch somewhere. Technical report, Xerox Corporation (December 1991)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mernik, M., Heering, J., Sloane, A.M.: When and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM Computing Surveys 37(4), 316–344 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nystrom, N., Clarkson, M.R., Myers, A.C.: Polyglot: An extensible compiler framework for Java. In: Hedin, G. (ed.) CC 2003 and ETAPS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2622, pp. 138–152. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rekers, J.: Parser Generation for Interactive Environments. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam (1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salomon, D.J., Cormack, G.V.: Scannerless NSLR(1) parsing of programming languages. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 24(7), 170–178 (1989); In: PLDI 1989 (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    de Rauglaudre, D.: Camlp4 reference manual (September 2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tomita, M.: Efficient Parsing for Natural Languages. A Fast Algorithm for Practical Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1985)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van Wyk, E., Schwerdfeger, A.: Context-aware scanning for parsing extensible languages. In: Lawall, J. (ed.) Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2007), pp. 63–72. ACM, New York (October 2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Visser, E.: Syntax Definition for Language Prototyping. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam (September 1997)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Visser, E.: Meta-programming with concrete object syntax. In: Batory, D., Consel, C., Taha, W. (eds.) GPCE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2487, pp. 299–315. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    van Wijngaarden, J., Visser, E.: Program transformation mechanics. a classification of mechanisms for program transformation with a survey of existing transformation systems. Technical Report UU-CS-2003-048, Institute of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University (May 2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zook, D., Huang, S.S., Smaragdakis, Y.: Generating AspectJ programs with Meta-AspectJ. In: Karsai, G., Visser, E. (eds.) GPCE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3286, pp. 1–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Bravenboer
    • 1
  • Eelco Visser
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Engineering Research GroupDelft University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations