On Aug 28, 2009, at 5:59 PM, C. Mundi wrote:
> > Terence, > > After reading the entire manuscript, the original, "Language Design > Patterns," seems more appropriate than ever. Many sections feel > like Language (Design Patterns) and others feel like (Language > Design) Patterns. So I say you can claim the associative ambiguity > as a "feature." :) ha! lol. well, i do talk *some* about design, but it's more side comments, right? > Instead, let me open another box o' monkeys (which will be in the > notes I'm sending to your publisher). Domain specificity is a > characteristic of a language, and not necessarily of the tools used > to implement the language. I'm sure the publisher wants DSL in the > title, in part because DSLs are Sexy and Hot Right Now. (And I > would agree that's a good enough reason; I admire effective > marketing.) But as I read the manuscript, I came away realizing > that -- apart from the choice of DSL-oriented examples -- the actual > patterns are for the most part broadly applicable beyond DSLs. You > might convince me otherwise; you are the expert here. I think your > book is not limited to DSLs, although that may be a good way to > position it at Amazon. > It's definitely more general; at this point DSL keyword is marketing. I also do many little languages as examples. Last chapter even discusses a RNA sequence matcher :) Ter List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "il-antlr-interest" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
