Re: [m2m-atl-dev] Feature proposal: ATL research VM with built-in compos

[Dennis Wagelaar <dennis.wagelaar@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear fellow ATL devs,

The EMFTVM has been approved and committed to the ATL CVS repository. Please read the README.TXT file in the org.eclipse.m2m.atl.emftvm.compiler plug-in to find out how to bootstrap the ATL-to-EMFTVM compiler (this does not happen automatically!).

N.B. I've comitted the *.test projects under "plugins" instead of "tests". Is this a problem?

N.B.2. Checkstyle won't accept the ATL configuration ("cannot initialize module TreeWalker - TreeWalker is not allowed as a parent of FileLength"). Do any of you have problem with using the ATL checkstyle config?

Kind regards,
Dennis Wagelaar


Op 12-05-11 19:48, Dennis Wagelaar schreef:
> Hello Andreza,
>
> The new VM should be available in CVS shortly after approval (+- 1 week?).
> Release will take longer, as this must be done together with the main ATL
> releases. The PMC_Approved flag has been set by now, so the code is one step
> further in the IP process. I'm not sure what other steps are necessary, and
> how long the entire approval process will take, though.
>
> If you really want to try out the code already, you can take a look at:
> http://soft.vub.ac.be/soft/research/mdd/emftvm
> N.B. The Eclipse committed code will *not* be compatible with the above
> version of EMFTVM due to rebranding (package names, plug-in IDs, etc.), and
> the above version will be discontinued as soon as EMFTVM is part of ATL.
>
> Regards,
> Dennis
>
> On 12/05/11 15:21, Andreza Vieira wrote:
>> Hello Dennis Wagelaar,
>>
>> That's a very good proposal.
>> After your proposal is accepted, when can the users obtain the new version
>> of the ATL VM? At moment, I'm using the actual ATL VM version and I'll have
>> to do some changes in my project to support the new version.
>>
>> Best regrads.
>> Andreza 
>>
>> 2011/5/12 Dennis Wagelaar <dennis.wagelaar@xxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:dennis.wagelaar@xxxxxxxxx>>
>>
>>     Dear fellow ATL devs,
>>
>>     As you may have noticed by now, I've submitted a feature proposal to IPzilla
>>     and Bugzilla. The feature concerns a new VM for ATL (EMFTVM), but also other
>>     rule-based transformations languages, that incorporates composition (rule
>>     inheritance, module superimposition) as an integral part. Most notable
>>     features of EMFTVM are:
>>
>>     - New bytecode format that includes a notion of rules (just like Java
>>     bytecode
>>     includes the notion of classes)
>>     - Support for multiple rule inheritance at load-time (explicit rules
>>     allow for
>>     late super-rule lookup)
>>     - Support for module import with rule/helper redefinition (i.e. module
>>     superimposition) that *combines* with rule inheritance
>>     - Support for closures (in the form of nested code blocks), which can be
>>     used
>>     for OCL's higher-order operations (collect, select, ...), but also ease
>>     compilation (1 ATL expression = 1 EMFTVM code block), and open the door for
>>     fine-grained concurrency (continuations, futures)
>>     - Includes a lazy implementation of OCL collections
>>     - ATL compiler written in ATL (new bytecode format is an EMF metamodel)
>>
>>     The reason I'd like to include EMFTVM with the ATL SDK, is to provide a
>>     research VM in which we can try out new features. The current ATL VM
>>     architecture makes it near impossible to change the bytecode format.
>>     EMFTVM's
>>     bytecode format can be changed more easily: the compiler is written in ATL,
>>     not AGC, so there is no hard dependency on the bytecode format. Also, the
>>     intention is to have only *one* implementation of the EMFTVM bytecode
>>     format.
>>
>>     ATL features tested out on EMFTVM in this way can later be included in the
>>     mainstraim compilers/VMs (e.g. multiple rule inheritance, closures, lazy
>>     collections). Other features rely on a change in the bytecode format (e.g.
>>     late super-rule lookup), and cannot be ported to the mainstraim VMs.
>>
>>     CAN YOU GUYS take a look at the IPzilla entry
>>     (https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5171) and mark the
>>     *PMC_Approved* flag if you agree that EMFTVM should be included with ATL?
>>     Thanks already!
>>
>>     Kind regards,
>>     Dennis Wagelaar
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     m2m-atl-dev mailing list
>>     m2m-atl-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:m2m-atl-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>     https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-atl-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Andreza Vieira
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m2m-atl-dev mailing list
>> m2m-atl-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-atl-dev
>