Hi Daniil, oops -- i just noticed this response from you from weeks ago. i'm guessing your question is all resolved for you by now. if not, please say so.
cheers, - Conal On 6/25/07, Daniil Elovkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Conal > > 2007/6/24, Conal Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > By "embedded" DSL, we usually mean identifying meta-language (Haskell) > > expressions with object language (DSL) expressions, rather than having > an > > "Exp" data type. Then you just use meta-language variables as > > object-language variables. The new data types you introduce are then > > domain-oriented rather than language-oriented. Is there a reason that > this > > kind of "embedded" approach doesn't work for you? > > Hmm, sorry, I must admit I didn't quite get it. > > However, in the situation I described, I don't just have an "Exp" data > type, rather have it (and probably some other data types) typeful. > Which lets me leverage the meta-language's (Haskell's) typing rules to > enforce correctness of my DS language's expression correctness. > > I absolutely didn't want to make an accent on "embedded". Sorry, if > that introduced some confusion. And that's not important or principal > to me, it's just how I called it. >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
