The UI looks slick. Removing duplicated concepts and thus getting stuff for free is cool (like completing editors). Specifying cross-references in the grammar, so they can be used (eg) by the editor to complete (eg) method names, is also very cool; and they claim this is unique in compiler construction (though I've written a grammar parser generator that specifies cross-references myself). The first link suggests generating an editor for free is the killer feature (http://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php?t=tree&goto=3701...)
I'm not sure I'd use it myself (my IDE is vim), and the specification of a grammar remains complex, despite the freebies - that's just the nature of the beast. (their ch. 2 and 3 are worth reading: http://www.eclipse.org/Xtext/documentation/1_0_0/xtext.html) It may not be that easy to use, if they can be profitable from professional services on it (but maybe that's not their main revenue). Finally, Z-Bo's comment Each generation of programmers thinks they can take a grocery clerk and turn them into not only a programmer but a compiler writer. reminds me of:
Old structural linguists get very angry when young structural linguists go on about it. Young structural linguists get deeply excited about it and stay up late at night convinced that they are very close to something of profound importance, and end up becoming old structural linguists before their time, getting very angry with the young ones.http://www.otostopcu.org/yazi/h2g2/b2c25.php (DNA, RatEotU)
I'm still on the young one's side (in attitude), but you've got to limit the scope and power of the tool, so it really is domain specific (and maybe simplifying the domain). It's not that users are dumb, but busy with other stuff.
I'm not sure I'd use it myself (my IDE is vim), and the specification of a grammar remains complex, despite the freebies - that's just the nature of the beast. (their ch. 2 and 3 are worth reading: http://www.eclipse.org/Xtext/documentation/1_0_0/xtext.html) It may not be that easy to use, if they can be profitable from professional services on it (but maybe that's not their main revenue). Finally, Z-Bo's comment Each generation of programmers thinks they can take a grocery clerk and turn them into not only a programmer but a compiler writer. reminds me of:
Old structural linguists get very angry when young structural linguists go on about it. Young structural linguists get deeply excited about it and stay up late at night convinced that they are very close to something of profound importance, and end up becoming old structural linguists before their time, getting very angry with the young ones. http://www.otostopcu.org/yazi/h2g2/b2c25.php (DNA, RatEotU)
I'm still on the young one's side (in attitude), but you've got to limit the scope and power of the tool, so it really is domain specific (and maybe simplifying the domain). It's not that users are dumb, but busy with other stuff.