|Suggestions required please .... email@example.com (1999-04-03)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-04-06)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... email@example.com (Dobes Vandermeer) (1999-04-06)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-04-09)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... email@example.com (1999-04-09)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-04-10)|
|Date:||3 Apr 1999 21:54:53 -0500|
|Keywords:||tools, question, design|
I'm designing an OOA/OOD tool and have got to the point where I
need to think of a prose representation for a UML-like methodology.
I already have a very strong data description language, and have a
comprehensive framework for FSMs - but need more work ( and will
accept any constructive suggestions ) on a procedural definition
language (PDL) to augment code that is automatically generated by
other parts of the tool.
The PDL will be translated into any other language the user
requires .... (anything from english-prose embedded in HTML to
assembly language) and so suffers that usual of tri-chotomies
.... simplicity of understanding vs simplicty of design vs power of
Because of the nature of the project's translation technique used
so far, I would like to be able to compile the PDL into a "semantic
database / repository" and generate the final language output from
that. Experience indicates that the language will reflect the internal
structure of the repository and thus an information model may be the
best/first port of call, however the repository may be created to
reflect the language if the language is the right choice. I am willing
to consider either and other possibilities.
Thank you in anticipation ....
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.