The applicability of DSL
When is a DSL applicable? When will using a DSL make our job easier?
There are several layers to the answer, depending on the type of DSL that we want, and the context that we want to apply it.
When building a technical DSL, we will generally use that as bootstrapping and configuration mechanism, to make it easier to modify and change a part of the system.
In general, those DSL are focused enabling recurring types of tasks, usually of one off nature. Configuration is a common scenario, since it is probably the simplest to explain and to start, but there are many other example. Build scripts comes to mind, in fact, scripting in general is a common area for technical DSL. Combining the power of a flexible language with a DSL directed at the task at hand makes for a powerful tool.
Another interesting task for DSL is mapping layers, we have the destination in mind, usually some domain object or DTO, and we get some input that we transform to that object. Here we use the DSL for ease of modification, and ease of just adding new handlers.
Again, technical DSL are shortcuts to code and to avoiding pain. You can do everything you do in a technical DSL using code. The DSL should make it easier, but the main benefit is one-of-a-kind solution to a type of task.
Note that this one of a kind solution doesn't mean throw-away code. it means that you would usually have a singular need in an application. Configuring the IoC container is a need that you have once per application, for example, but it is critically important part of the application, and something that you go back. For the last year and half or so, we have used Binsor to just that, as a DSL that can configure the IoC container for us. It allowed very good flexibility in that it would allow use to define per project conventions very easily.
Technical DSL are usually the glue that holds stuff together.
What about business DSL?
Here, the situation is different. Business DSL are almost always about rules and the actions to be taken when those rules are met.
This sounds like a very narrow space, doesn't it? But let me state in another way, the place of a business DSL is to define policy, while the application code defined the actual operations. A simple examples will be defining the rules for order processing. Those, in turn, will affect the following domain objects:
- Discounts
- Payment plans
- Shipping options
- Authorization Rules
The application code then takes this and act upon it.
Policy is usually the place where we make most changes, while the operations of the system are mostly fixed. We are also not limited to a single DSL per application, in fact, we will probably have several, both technical and business focused DSL. Each of those will handle a specific set of scenarios (processing orders, authorizing payments, suggesting new products, etc).
What about building the entire system as a set of DSL?
That may be a very interesting approach to the task. In this scenario, we inverse the usual application code to DSL metrics, and decide that the application code that we would like to build would be about mostly infrastructure concerns and the requirements of the DSL. I would typically like to use this type of approach in backend processing systems. Doing UI on top of a DSL is certainly possible, but at this point, I think that we will hit the point of diminishing returns. Mostly because UI are usually complex, and you want to be able to handle them appropriately. A complex DSL is a programming language, and at the point, you would probably want to use a programming language to work with rather than a DSL.
There is an exception to that, assuming that your application code is in Boo. They you are working with a programming language, and then you can build a technical DSL that will work in concrete with the actual frameworks that you are using. Rails is a good example of this approach.
Assuming that you write your application code in a language that is not suited for DSL, however, you would probably want to have a more strict separation of the two approaches. Using DSL to define policy and using the application code to define the framework and the operations that can be executed by the system.
Building such a system turns out to be almost trivial, because all you need to do is apply the operations (usually fairly well understood) and then can play around with the policy at will. If you have done your job well, you'll likely have the ability to sit down with the customer and define the policy and have them review it at the same time.
I wonder how and why you would test those...
Comments
Hi Ayende,
Your mentioning using Boo alot lately in your posts. I know you are very interested in Boo.
Where I work at, Boo would not be acceptable. That being said, can this DSL be used in C# ?
It's like overcoming too many hurdles: Boo and DSL. Both would be impossible to implement in some of the corporate environments that I work in. ie. We have programmers who still write procedural code in C# and dont' understand object oriented principles.
Steve,
Take a look at the older messages in this category, I covered this before.
Hey Oren,
Are you writing the same book as Martin Fowler on DSLs? If not, I believe you are writing one at the same time he is....
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/BookCode.html
Let me know...
Adam
I am writing a book about DSL.
I don't write it with Fowler :-)
Do you have a publisher? If yes, who is it? :)
Pierre Henri,
Manning :-)
Comment preview