Extending Little Languages into Big Systems

  • Gábor Páli
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7241)


A classic layout for complex software applications usually involves a set of fine-tuned performance-optimized routines that are combined and controlled from a higher layer in a lightweight fashion. As the application grows, reliable operation, portability, and maintainability gets to be a real concern. However, this can be tamed by abstracting away from the platform-dependent details by modelling the components and their relation on a higher level. Using a functional programming language combined with the technique of language embedding may be an answer when implementation of such solution comes in question [1][2]. In this design, the component descriptions may be captured by an adequate embedded domain-specific language that compiles to a lower-level language but there also has to be a way for composition and therefore getting a complete working application out of them. In this paper, we propose a method for extending compiled embedded domain-specific languages into a stand-alone system with minimal effort.


Target Language Open Node Functional Programming Language Data Dependency Graph Redundancy Elimination 
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.
    Felleisen, M., Findler, B., Flatt, M., et al.: Building Little Languages With Macros, Dr. Dobb’s Journal (April 2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elliott, C., Finne, S., de Moor, O.: Compiling Embedded Languages. In: Taha, W. (ed.) SAIG 2000. LNCS, vol. 1924, pp. 9–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Axelsson, E., Claessen, K., Dévai, G., Horváth, Z., Keijzer, K., Lyckegård, B., Persson, A., Sheeran, M., Svenningsson, J., Vajda, A.: Feldspar: A Domain Specific Language for Digital Signal Processing algorithms. In: Eighth ACM/IEEE International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign, Grenoble, France, July 26–28 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schüpbach, A., Peter, S., Baumann, A., et al.: Embracing Diversity in the Barrelfish Manycore Operating System. In: Proc. of the Workshop on Managed Many-Core Systems (MMCS 2008) (June 2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gill, A., Launchbury, J., Peyton Jones, S.L.: A Short-Cut to Deforestation. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Functional Programming Languages and Compiler Architecture, FPCA (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dagand, P.E., Baumann, A., Roscoe, T.: Filet-o-Fish: Practical and Dependable Domain-Specific Language for OS Development. ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee, E., Hylands, C., Janneck, J., et al.: Overview of the Ptolemy Project Technical Report UCB/ERL M01/11, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brorsson, M., Faxen, K.-F., Popov, K.: ArchiDeS: A Programming Framework for Multicore Chips. In: Swedish Workshop on Multicore Computing, MCC 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Enea, A.B.: Enea OSE: Multicore Real-Time Operating System (2011),
  10. 10.
    Marlow, S.: Parallel and Concurrent Programming in Haskell. In: Central European Functional Programming Summer School (CEFP), Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, June 14–24 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marlow, S., Newton, R., Peyton Jones, S.L.: A Monad for Deterministic Parallelism. In: Haskell 2011: Proc. of the 4th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Haskell, Tokyo, Japan. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paterson, R.: Arrows and Computation. In: The Fun of Programming, pp. 201–222, Palgrave (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gábor Páli
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Babeş-Bolyai UniversityCluj-NapocaRomania

Personalised recommendations