<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>http://mw.hh.se/wg211/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=WG211%2FM12Erwig</id>
	<title>WG211/M12Erwig - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mw.hh.se/wg211/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=WG211%2FM12Erwig"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://mw.hh.se/wg211/index.php?title=WG211/M12Erwig&amp;action=history"/>
	<updated>2026-04-05T20:56:50Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.43.5</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>http://mw.hh.se/wg211/index.php?title=WG211/M12Erwig&amp;diff=798&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Ups: Created page with &quot;&#039;&#039;Towards Explicitness as a Language Design Criterion&#039;&#039; by Martin Erwig  The specific set of features offered by a particular (programming) language is often a reflection of a (p...&quot;</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://mw.hh.se/wg211/index.php?title=WG211/M12Erwig&amp;diff=798&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2013-04-22T08:01:00Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Created page with &amp;quot;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Towards Explicitness as a Language Design Criterion&amp;#039;&amp;#039; by Martin Erwig  The specific set of features offered by a particular (programming) language is often a reflection of a (p...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Towards Explicitness as a Language Design Criterion&amp;#039;&amp;#039; by Martin Erwig&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The specific set of features offered by a particular (programming) language is&lt;br /&gt;
often a reflection of a (potentially unconcious) design decision about which&lt;br /&gt;
aspects of the language&amp;#039;s semantic domain are made explicit and which aspects&lt;br /&gt;
are left implicit. Among the advantages offered by explicit representations&lt;br /&gt;
are the promise for users to being better able to express intent, the&lt;br /&gt;
avoidance of hidden and thus often vague and ambiguous assumptions, and the&lt;br /&gt;
opportunity for manipulability, that is, the opportunity for transformations&lt;br /&gt;
of all kinds. The disadvantages of explicit representations are that they lead&lt;br /&gt;
to more complex languages with more interactions between features and thus&lt;br /&gt;
potentially more complex semantics.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In this presentation I want to draw attention to the aspect of explicitness by&lt;br /&gt;
presenting a number of examples. I would like to start a discussion of the&lt;br /&gt;
subject that can help to answer the following questions: (1) How can we&lt;br /&gt;
perform cost/benefit analysis for explicit representations? (2) What obvious&lt;br /&gt;
and not-so-obvious guidelines can we devise that could help language designers&lt;br /&gt;
decide whether or not to make a particular language aspect explicit? (3) Can&lt;br /&gt;
those cost/benefit analyses and guidelines employed efficaciously in the&lt;br /&gt;
redesign of existing languages and notations?&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Ups</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>