After the Galileo release of Xtext we are now focussing on the next iteration. We've had a
face-to-face meeting in Kiel and discussed the different ideas, our process and what the "themes" for our Helios development are.
In this post I want to share our vision of how the road to Helios could! look like. I say 'could' because although we have a rough idea of where we want to go, we know from the past, that the actual road we go will slightly differ. That is things we find useful today might have become less important in six months. "Round And Round The Earth Is Turning" :-).
I'll outline our visions and priorities along the four themes we identified for the Helios development period.
Theme I : Clean CodeOur code base is already comparatively clean but we want it to be even cleaner. Cleanness in code means the following to us:
DRY - Don't repeat yourself
Every information should be kept in one place only. This is as everything I write not meant dogmatic. So, there are of course situations where it is more pragmatic to duplicate a piece of information.
KISS - Keep it small and simpleSolutions should only be as complicated as they need to be. Sometimes it is hard to understand for developers that they have solved a problem but we do not want to check it in in that way. That is of course not because we do not appreciate the effort. It is because we think it is too complex, and we do not want to add superfluous complexity to the code base. Of course opinions of what is superfluous and what is not might as well differ :-).
Keep it testable and have testsCode needs to be testable. If it is not testable unit testing is either not possible or it is too complicated and therefore is fragile and complex. We want to have sufficient unit tests. Sufficient is again a weak statement. Usually one has too little tests, so having too many tests is very seldom the case. Mature and published code can't have too many tests, as long as each test covers a different case. Note that the code cleanness of unit tests is as important as the code quality of the production code. When we fix bugs we usually do test first. That is we write a failing test reproducing the reported miss behavior and fix it afterwards.
In Xtext we have more LOC in the tests than in production code.
CommentsAny comments need to reflect the code! Wrong comments are far more problematic than no comments.
Inlined comments are a smell. They tell you that your code is not readable. Most of the time the simplest thing to do in order to avoid such comments is extracting a method and naming that method like the comment you wanted to put in front of that code snippet.
JavaDoc comments are important. This is an aspect where we should improve our code base.
JavaDocs should be as small as possible and as verbose as needed in order to understand the contract behind the API at hand. We only add JavaDocs to primary hooks. Internal stuff is seldom commented because we can do a quick view at the code in order to understand what's going on. At least as long as the code fulfills the next requirement.
ReadabilityCode is read far more often than it is written or edited. So it's especially important to write the code so that your intentions are clear. Small functions and expressive names are good starting points.
Theme II : Usability (UI Quality & Features, API Quality, Documentation Quality)UI Quality and FeaturesIn Galileo we mainly focused on putting the main abstractions in place and creating a solid framework. Some UI features were therefore postponed.
One of the first things we want to do in Helios is adding the
EMF Index and making the usage of it and
the corresponding scope provider the default. Based on that we have information about all cross file references, which enables us to not only automatically trigger validation of referencing models, but also provide advanced navigation features and things like rename refactoring.
API QualityIt is our desire that people have fun when working with the abstractions we provide.
The mantra for last year's development was 'We aim to make simple things simple and complex things possible.' (by Alan Kay). Which means to us that what the 80% of things we want to do with a framework needs to be as simple as possible, but at the same time we need to make sure that the other 20% are still possible (and ideally also not too hard to accomplish). Of course there are use cases which simply do not fall into the scope of a framework but that is a different story.
Documentation QualityOur
documentation is in a relatively good shape, but still can be improved. We are convinced that good documentation is key for the overall acceptance of a framework.
So keeping the documentation current and keeping a good quality is part of our development process. That is adding or changing code is always paired with adding and changing tests and updating the documentation.
Theme III : Performance & Scalability This has been a major theme for last year's development as well.
Given user stories like the
talk about Xtext and AUTOSAR proposed for ESE 2009, it seems that we met this non-functional requirement fair enough.
But that does not mean that we don't need to check it from time to time, or that users neverface performance issues. We take this aspect very serious.
But of course we do not write optimized code as along as we haven't measured that optimization is worth the extra unreadability, complexity or what ever.
What we do is having regular profiling sessions and thinking about different use cases when we design concepts.
Theme IV : Increase Applicability (Base Language, Grammar Features)So far all the themes are more or less about, improving the quality. I haven't talked about many new features (despite the mentioning of EMF Index and what it means for some UI features we want to implement). You will of course see many improvements and new features I haven't mentioned in this post. We decide which bugzillas to work on from milestone to milestone (I'll write about what is coming in M2 in a separate post.)
But there is one huge "feature" we want to do and I want to mention it here:
Base LanguageWe want to provide a base language, which can be extended and customized by users. The idea is not new: The Intentional Workbench as well as MPS both have similar things. Despite that these frameworks are of a different nature (they are not text-based) we also don't want to implement Java or C# (that is what they do), but come up with a much simpler and nicer language. Actually I like Scala very much, because it has very little concepts in it and allows to define new concepts out of them. But with an Xtext-based language you don't need the syntactical flexibility of Scala or Ruby, because the parser and the compiler are open and you can change the language as it seems fit. Imagine state machines with action implementations, entity models with implementation for operations and derived attributes, validation languages etc. Looking at the current land scape of external DSLs I'ld say that about 90% of all languages would benefit from support for embedding expressions. Some people already have implemented their own expression language others reuse the language of the target platform, i.e. they write the behavior in Java and mix it into the generated code.
Sebastian and I gave a
talk about this at Code Generation 2009 in June.
In order to show and prove how great such a language is, we plan to implement an EMFatic version that supports adding implementation for EOperations and derived EStructuralFeatures.
With that you'll no longer need to change the generated code (at least most of the time) and you'ld have everything in one place.
In addition DSLs for common viewpoints in Xtext, such as scoping, validation, quick fixes, formatting, etc. would be nice.
The base language is a huge effort and will likely not be finished by next year. As of now I'm not sure if and how much it will be included in the Helios release.
Java adaptionAnother really nice thing we're already working on is, having a thin EMF adapter layer to JDT's Java model. This allows for referencing Java elements from within a DSL, which is very often desired. Reimplementing MWE with a nicer syntax will be a matter of a couple of days when we have this feature. We want this to be tightly integrated with EMF Index.
This is also a bigger topic but will definitely be part of Helios (actually we plan to have it finished by M4).
Grammar FeaturesThere are a lot of ideas of additional features for the grammar language. We haven't decided on them yet but things like multiple grammar inheritance might get more important when we ship a base language. But what exactly such a feature would mean and what the consequences are still has to grow on us.
DISCLAIMERPlease don't take any of these ideas as guaranteed. This is what we currently have in mind but our view of the world will change. Also note that developing the base language we have in mind is a big effort, so it might take us more than just one release cycle.
I'll write a post for each milestone in order to tell what we exactly we did and do.
