Microsoft's Software Factories and DSLs

This article over at SD Magazine written by Jack Greenfield and Keith Short from Microsoft argues:
Patterns demonstrate limited but effective knowledge reuse. The next step is to move from documentation to automation, using languages, frameworks and tools to automate more of the software life cycle.
We are using UML for documentation, but we are using models based on small, focused, domain specific languages (DSLs) for automation. DSL based tools can help developers define and assemble components, such as web services, generate their implementations using framework completion, and capture metadata used to automate validation, packaging, deployment, configuration management, test generation, defect tracking and many other aspects of the software life cycle. We are using high fidelity DSL based models as first class software development artifacts.
The description on the accompanying book adds:
using models based on highly tuned Domain Specific Languages (DSLs) and the Extensible Markup Language (XML) as source artifacts

My question is: with highly dynamic languages like python, which often reads more like pseudocode, and a complementary declarative language, may be a lot can be accomplished without resorting to DSLs? Definitely beats learning a new configuration language for every new tool.

More at: Microsoft .Net architecture.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I've written here about Micro

I've written here about Microsoft DSLs vs. UML a few times. I guess you'll find them by looking in the software engineering department.

My take: dynamic languages as such are not a solution as far as domain engineering gooes.


See here.