Hi Timothy,<div>If I understand right FoF is a model for "C" and that one could describe his/her intent in FoF in a concise manner and corresponding "C" could be generated. Could the commonalities under various dirs under arch have been abstracted into a DSL?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Can we not have all the source code in DSL's alone?</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><div>Kashyap<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Timothy Roscoe <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:troscoe@inf.ethz.ch" target="_blank">troscoe@inf.ethz.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
Hi Kashyap,<br>
<br>
I'm not sure what you mean - in general you need to have some general<br>
purpose language to glue everything together. Our use of DSLs is very<br>
pragmatic: we generally use one when we think there's a chance it will<br>
make our like easier. There is a chance some will converge (both<br>
Mackerel and Hamlet need to specify physical data layout, for<br>
example), but we'll always have C.<br>
<br>
-- Timothy Roscoe<br>
<div><br>
At Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:48:45 +0530, C K Kashyap <<a href="mailto:ckkashyap@gmail.com" target="_blank">ckkashyap@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi folks,<br>
><br>
</div>> I was a little surprised to see s o much of C code in the source base. Is the<br>
<div><div></div><div>> plan to eventually have code only in DSEL's?<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Regards,<br>
> Kashyap<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Regards,<br>Kashyap<br>
</div></div>