Notes Pending

I'd like to encourage everyone to post PDF and ppt of their talks as soon as possible. A nice style for doing this has already been established by various speakers in previous posts below. The sooner you do this, the more comments you will get on your work.

The following notes will be moved to future posts once discussants have created their entries.

Olivier's talk:

- To respond to William's question, "compiler" in Olivier's talk basically means translation, and it tends to be a source-to-source translation
- Olivier: An environment is a mapping. Explicit substitutions have an operational semantics, and in particular give rise to the need to compositions on environments.
- Big disagreement about the importance of the importance of compositional translations.

Ken Friis' talk

- Oleg: I absolutely loved your discussant presentation! Where does the initial/final embedding terminology come from? Can you provide a reference? (These forms seems to correspond to what is typically called deep/shallow embedding)

Jeff's talk

- Four out of the five panelists mentioned lack of tool support as the main problems facing adoption of DSLs. I thought that that was a very well articulated observation.
- Also noted that we currently focus for the most part on piggy-backing on an existing GPL.
- Really liked example of debugging an ANTLR grammar, and point about going beyond reusing "just" the compiler of the GPL.

Henrik's keynote
- I really liked the explanation of causal and acausal modeling with linear circuit components. Using the linear circuit components as examples components makes it easier to see why directing the equations can lead to an exponential explosion in the number of ways that components can be combined.
- Breaking pendulum is a great example of a hybrid system! I can imagine a lot of variants illustrating all kinds of different HS issues.

Mikolas talk:
- Wow! It was scary to realize that "rm *" can actually mean "rm -rf *" if you happen to have a file called "-rf".

Oege's keynote:
- It was really interesting to hear about the "denotationalist movement". While the syntactic approach could be criticized, I don't think it can be called "the wrong approach" because it was, for some time, the only approach: effects, aliasing, and sharing have for a long time made it quite hard to work accurately with denotational semantics.
- William suggested talking about the number of typing bugs that have been found by using the static analysis.

Franz's talk:
- Loved your version of the "hacking slide"!