author = {Neamtiu, Iulian and Foster, Jeffrey S. and Hicks, Michael},
title = {Understanding source code evolution using abstract syntax tree matching},
year = {2005},
isbn = {1595931236},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {New York, NY, USA},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/1083142.1083143},
doi = {10.1145/1083142.1083143},
abstract = {Mining software repositories at the source code level can provide a greater understanding of how software evolves. We present a tool for quickly comparing the source code of different versions of a C program. The approach is based on partial abstract syntax tree matching, and can track simple changes to global variables, types and functions. These changes can characterize aspects of software evolution useful for answering higher level questions. In particular, we consider how they could be used to inform the design of a dynamic software updating system. We report results based on measurements of various versions of popular open source programs. including BIND, OpenSSH, Apache, Vsftpd and the Linux kernel.},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories},
author = {Neamtiu, Iulian and Foster, Jeffrey S. and Hicks, Michael},
title = {Understanding source code evolution using abstract syntax tree matching},
year = {2005},
issue_date = {July 2005},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {New York, NY, USA},
volume = {30},
number = {4},
issn = {0163-5948},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/1082983.1083143},
doi = {10.1145/1082983.1083143},
abstract = {Mining software repositories at the source code level can provide a greater understanding of how software evolves. We present a tool for quickly comparing the source code of different versions of a C program. The approach is based on partial abstract syntax tree matching, and can track simple changes to global variables, types and functions. These changes can characterize aspects of software evolution useful for answering higher level questions. In particular, we consider how they could be used to inform the design of a dynamic software updating system. We report results based on measurements of various versions of popular open source programs. including BIND, OpenSSH, Apache, Vsftpd and the Linux kernel.},
title = {An object oriented approach to constructing recursive descent parsers},
year = {2000},
issue_date = {Feb.2000},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {New York, NY, USA},
volume = {35},
number = {2},
issn = {0362-1340},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/345105.345113},
doi = {10.1145/345105.345113},
abstract = {We discuss a technique to construct a recursive descent parser for a context free language using concepts found in object oriented design and implementation. A motivation for the technique is given. The technique is then introduced with snippets of a Smalltalk implementation. Some advantages and disadvantages of the technique are examined. Finally some areas of possible future work are discussed.},
title = {Programming language evolution via source code query languages},
year = {2012},
isbn = {9781450316316},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {New York, NY, USA},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/2414721.2414728},
doi = {10.1145/2414721.2414728},
abstract = {Programming languages evolve just like programs. Language features are added and removed, for example when programs using them are shown to be error-prone. When language features are modified, deprecated, removed or even deemed unsuitable for the project at hand, it is necessary to analyse programs to identify occurrences to refactor.Source code query languages in principle provide a good way to perform this analysis by exploring codebases. Such languages are often used to identify code to refactor, bugs to fix or simply to understand a system better.This paper evaluates seven Java source code query languages: Java Tools Language, Browse-By-Query, SOUL, JQuery, .QL, Jackpot and PMD as to their power at expressing queries required by several use cases (such as code idioms to be refactored).},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the ACM 4th Annual Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools},
title = {Abstract Syntax Tree for Programming Language Understanding and Representation: How Far Are We?},
author = {Weisong Sun and Chunrong Fang and Yun Miao and Yudu You and Mengzhe Yuan and Yuchen Chen and Quanjun Zhang and An Guo and Xiang Chen and Yang Liu and Zhenyu Chen},
year = {2023},
eprint = {2312.00413},
archiveprefix = {arXiv},
primaryclass = {cs.SE}
}
@misc{BabelSpecCompliant,
title = {{What is Babel? {$\cdot$} Babel}},
year = {2024},
month = may,
urldate = {2024-05-29},
note = {[Online; accessed 29. May 2024]},
url = {https://babeljs.io/docs/#spec-compliant}
}
@misc{TC39RecommendBabel,
title = {{how-we-work/implement.md at main {$\cdot$} tc39/how-we-work}},
title = {{Xtext - Language Engineering Made Easy!}},
year = {2024},
month = feb,
urldate = {2024-05-29},
note = {[Online; accessed 29. May 2024]},
url = {https://eclipse.dev/Xtext}
}
@article{LanguageWorkbench,
title = {Evaluating and comparing language workbenches: Existing results and benchmarks for the future},
author = {Erdweg, Sebastian and Van Der Storm, Tijs and V{\"o}lter, Markus and Tratt, Laurence and Bosman, Remi and Cook, William R and Gerritsen, Albert and Hulshout, Angelo and Kelly, Steven and Loh, Alex and others},
journal = {Computer Languages, Systems \& Structures},
author = {Mernik, Marjan and Heering, Jan and Sloane, Anthony M.},
title = {When and how to develop domain-specific languages},
year = {2005},
issue_date = {December 2005},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {New York, NY, USA},
volume = {37},
number = {4},
issn = {0360-0300},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/1118890.1118892},
doi = {10.1145/1118890.1118892},
abstract = {Domain-specific languages (DSLs) are languages tailored to a specific application domain. They offer substantial gains in expressiveness and ease of use compared with general-purpose programming languages in their domain of application. DSL development is hard, requiring both domain knowledge and language development expertise. Few people have both. Not surprisingly, the decision to develop a DSL is often postponed indefinitely, if considered at all, and most DSLs never get beyond the application library stage.Although many articles have been written on the development of particular DSLs, there is very limited literature on DSL development methodologies and many questions remain regarding when and how to develop a DSL. To aid the DSL developer, we identify patterns in the decision, analysis, design, and implementation phases of DSL development. Our patterns improve and extend earlier work on DSL design patterns. We also discuss domain analysis tools and language development systems that may help to speed up DSL development. Finally, we present a number of open problems.},
journal = {ACM Comput. Surv.},
month = {dec},
pages = {316–344},
numpages = {29},
keywords = {Domain-specific language, application language, domain analysis, language development system}
}
@misc{CodeQL,
title = {{CodeQL}},
year = {2024},
month = may,
urldate = {2024-05-29},
note = {[Online; accessed 29. May 2024]},
url = {https://codeql.github.com}
}
@misc{Coccinelle,
title = {{Coccinelle The Linux Kernel documentation}},
author = {Moor, Oege de and Verbaere, Mathieu and Hajiyev, Elnar and Avgustinov, Pavel and Ekman, Torbjorn and Ongkingco, Neil and Sereni, Damien and Tibble, Julian},
booktitle = {Seventh IEEE International Working Conference on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM 2007)},
title = {Keynote Address: .QL for Source Code Analysis},
