\chapter{Prelude}%
\label{chp:introduction}
\begin{chapterabstract}
- This chapter introduces the dissertation and thesis by providing:
+ This chapter introduces the dissertation by providing:
\begin{itemize}
\item a general introduction to the topics and research venues;
\item a reading guide;
\end{itemize}
\end{chapterabstract}
-There are at least 13.4 billion devices connected to the internet at the time of writing\footnote{\url{https://transformainsights.com/research/tam/market}, accessed on: \formatdate{13}{10}{2022}}.
+There are at least 13.4 billion devices connected to the internet at the time of writing\footnote{\refurl{https://transformainsights.com/research/tam/market}{\formatdate{13}{10}{2022}}}.
Each of these senses, acts, or otherwise interacts with people, other computers, and the environment surrounding us.
Despite their immense diversity, they are all computers.
And as computers, they require software to operate.
An increasing amount of these connected devices are so-called \emph{edge devices} that operate in the \gls{IOT}.
-Edge devices are the leafs of the \gls{IOT} systems, they perform the interaction with the physical world.
+Edge devices are the leafs of the \gls{IOT} systems, they perform the interaction with the physical world and are physically embedded in the fabric.
+They usually reside in hard-to-reach places such as light bulbs, smart electricity meters, or even farm animals.
+Equipped with a lot of connectivity for integrating peripherals such as sensors and actuators, makes them very suitable to interact with their surroundings.
Typically, these edge devices are powered by microcontrollers.
-These miniature computers contain integrated circuits that accomodates a microprocessor designed for use in embedded applications.
-Typically, microcontrollers are therefore tiny; have little memory; contain a slow, but energy-efficient processor; and allow for a lot of connectivity for integrating peripherals such as sensors and actuators in order to interact with their surroundings.
+These miniature computers contain integrated circuits that accommodate a microprocessor designed for use in embedded applications.
+Hence, microcontrollers are therefore cheap; tiny; have little memory; and contain a slow, but energy-efficient processor.
Unlike the conductor in the orchestra waving their baton to instruct the ensemble of instruments, in the universe of software there is room for little error.
+Moreover, in dynamic \gls{IOT} applications, often there is not even a conductor or coordinator.
+Even though edge devices—the instruments—come and go, perform their own pieces, or are instructed to perform a certain piece, they operate without a central authority.
In the traditional setting, an \gls{IOT} engineer has to program each device and their interoperation using different programming paradigms, programming languages, and abstraction levels.
Thus resulting in semantic friction, making programming and maintaining \gls{IOT} systems is a complex and error-prone process.
-This thesis describes the research carried out around orchestrating these complex \gls{IOT} systems using \gls{TOP}.
+This dissertation describes the research carried out around orchestrating these complex \gls{IOT} systems using \gls{TOP}.
\Gls{TOP} is an innovative tierless programming paradigm for interactive multi-layered systems.
-By utilising advanced compiler technologies, much of the internals, communications, and interoperations between the tiers\slash{}layers of the applications is automatically generated.
+By utilising advanced compiler technologies, much of the internals, communications, and interoperation between the tiers\slash{}layers of the applications is automatically generated.
From a single declarative specification of the work required, the compiler makes a ready-for-work application consisting of interconnected components for all tiers.
For example, the \gls{TOP} system \gls{ITASK} can be used to program all layers of a multi-user distributed web applications from a single source specification.
-It is implemented in \gls{CLEAN} and executes also in \gls{CLEAN}'s run time.
-The final executable is very low level and contains all these abstraction levels, this results in increased hardware requirements.
+It is implemented in \gls{CLEAN}, executes also in \gls{CLEAN}'s general-purpose run time, and requires relatively powerful hardware.
The high hardware requirements are no problem for regular computers but impractical for the average edge device.
This is where \glspl{DSL} must be brought into play.
+Using \glspl{DSL}, hardware requirements can be drastically lowered, even with high levels of abstraction for the specified domain.
\Glspl{DSL} are programming languages created with a specific domain in mind.
Consequently, jargon does not have to be expressed in the language itself, but they can be built-in features.
-As a result, hardware requirements can be drastically lowered, even with high levels of abstraction for the specified domain.
+Furthermore, the \gls{DSL} can eschew language or system features that are irrelevant for the domain.
-To incorporate the plethora of edge devices in the orchestra of an \gls{IOT} system, the \gls{MTASK} system is used.
+To incorporate the plethora of edge devices in the orchestra of a \gls{TOP} system, the \gls{MTASK} system is used.
\Gls{MTASK} is a novel programming language for programming \gls{IOT} edge devices using \gls{TOP}.
Where \gls{ITASK} abstracts away from the gritty details of multi-tier web applications, \gls{MTASK} has domain-specific abstractions for \gls{IOT} edge devices, maintaining the high abstraction level that \gls{TOP} generally offers.
As it is integrated with \gls{ITASK}, it allows for all layers of an \gls{IOT} application to be programmed from a single source.
\begin{quote}\emph{%
A \emph{rhapsody} in music is a one-movement work that is episodic yet integrated, free-flowing in structure, featuring a range of highly contrasted moods, colour, and tonality.}
\end{quote}
-%The three episodes in this thesis are barded by the introduction and conclusion (\cref{chp:introduction,chp:conclusion}).
+This dissertation consists of three episodes.
\Cref{prt:dsl} is a paper-based---otherwise known as cumulative---episode containing chapters that provide insight in advanced \gls{DSL} embedding techniques for \gls{FP} languages.
The chapters are readable independently.
\Cref{prt:top} is a monograph showing \gls{MTASK}, a \gls{TOP} \gls{DSL} for the \gls{IOT}.
As edge hardware needs to be cheap, small-scale, and energy efficient, the microcontrollers used to power them do not have a lot of computational power, only a soup\c{c}on of memory, and little communication bandwidth.
Typically, these devices are unable to run a full-fledged general-purpose \gls{OS}.
Rather they employ compiled firmware written in imperative languages that combines all tasks on the device in a single program.
-While devices are getting a bit faster, smaller, and cheaper, they keep these properties to an extent, greatly reducing the flexibility for dynamic systems when tasks are created on the fly, executed on demand, or require parallel execution.
-As program memory is mostly flash-based and only lasts a couple of thousands of writes before it wears out, it is not suitable for rapid reconfiguring and reprogramming.
+While devices are getting a bit faster, smaller, and cheaper, they keep these properties to an extent.
+For example, more powerful microcontrollers are capable of running \gls{RTOS}, but this still requires many resources and fixes the programs at compile time.
+As a consequence, the flexibility is greatly reduced for dynamic systems in which tasks are created on the fly, executed on demand, or require parallel execution.
+As program memory is mostly flash-based and only lasts a couple of thousands of writes before it wears out, it is not suitable for repeated reconfiguring and reprogramming.
These problems can be mitigated by dynamically sending code to be interpreted to the microcontroller.
With interpretation, a specialized interpreter is flashed in the program memory once it receives the program code to execute at run time.
Therefore, as the programs are not stored in the flash memory, it does not wear out.
It is challenging to create interpreters for small edge devices due to the severe hardware restrictions.
-However, the hardware requirements can be reduced by embedding domain-specific data into the langauge, so called \gls{DSL}; and the interpreter, a domain-specific \gls{OS}.
+This dissertation describes a \gls{DSL} that encompasses the high-level programming concepts of \gls{TOP}, while it can be executed on edge devices with very limited requirements.
+It does so by compiling the \gls{DSL} to byte code that is executed in a feather-light domain-specific \gls{OS}.
\section{\texorpdfstring{\Glsxtrlongpl{DSL}}{Domain-specific languages}}%
\label{sec:back_dsl}
% General
-Programming languages can be divided up into two categories: \glspl{DSL}\footnotemark\ and \glspl{GPL} \citep{fowler_domain_2010}.
-\footnotetext{Historically \glsxtrshortpl{DSL} have been called DSELs as well.}
+Programming languages can be divided up into two categories: \glspl{DSL} and \glspl{GPL} \citep{fowler_domain_2010}.
Where \glspl{GPL} are not made with a demarcated area in mind, \glspl{DSL} are tailor-made for a specific domain.
Writing idiomatic domain-specific code in a \gls{DSL} is easier and requires less background knowledge about a \gls{GPL}.
This does come at the cost of the \gls{DSL} being sometimes less expressive to an extent that it may not even be Turing complete.
Standalone languages are languages for which the complete toolchain has been developed, just as for any other \gls{GPL}.
Embedded languages piggyback on an existing \gls{GPL}, they are defined in terms of their host language.
\Glspl{EDSL} can further be classified into heterogeneous and homogeneous languages (\cref{sec:hetero_homo}).
-In homogeneous languages all components are integrated whereas in heterogeneous \glspl{DSL}, some parts are ignorant of the other systems, e.g.\ a \gls{DSL} that generates code that is compiled by an existing compiler.
+In homogeneous languages all components are integrated whereas in heterogeneous \glspl{DSL}, some parts are agnostic of the other systems, e.g.\ a \gls{DSL} that generates code for execution on a totally different system.
This hyponymy is shown in \cref{fig:hyponymy_of_dsls}.
\begin{figure}
\glspl{DSL} where historically created as standalone languages, meaning that all machinery is developed solely for the language.
The advantage of this approach is that the language designer is free to define the syntax and type system of the language as they wish, not being restricted by any constraint.
Unfortunately it also means that they need to develop a compiler or interpreter, and all the scaffolding for the language, making standalone \glspl{DSL} costly to create.
-Examples of standalone \glspl{DSL} are regular expressions, make, yacc, XML, SQL, \etc.
+Examples of standalone \glspl{DSL} are \TeX, \LaTeX, make, yacc, XML, SQL, \etc.
The dichotomous approach is embedding the \gls{DSL} in a host language, i.e.\ \glspl{EDSL} \citep{hudak_modular_1998}.
By defining the language as constructs in the host language, much of the machinery is inherited \citep{krishnamurthi_linguistic_2001}.
-This greatly reduces the cost of creating embedded languages.
+This greatly reduces the cost of creating embedded languages and shields the user from having to learn a general-purpose language and toolchain.
However, there are two sides to this coin.
If the syntax of the host language is not very flexible, the syntax of the \gls{DSL} may become clumsy.
Furthermore, \gls{DSL} errors shown to the programmer may be larded with host language errors, making it difficult for a non-expert of the host language to work with the \gls{DSL}.
On the other hand, heterogeneous \glspl{EDSL} are languages that are not executed in the host language.
For example, \citet{elliott_compiling_2003} describe the language Pan, for which the final representation in the host language is a compiler that will, when executed, generate code for a completely different target platform.
In fact, \gls{ITASK} and \gls{MTASK} are embedded \glspl{DSL}.
-\Gls{ITASK} runs in its host language as well, so it is a homogeneous \gls{DSL}.
-Tasks written using \gls{MTASK} are dynamically compiled to byte code for an edge device and is therefore a heterogeneous \gls{DSL}.
+Programs written in \gls{ITASK} run in the host language, and is a homogeneous \gls{DSL}.
+Tasks written using \gls{MTASK} are dynamically compiled to byte code for an edge device, making it a heterogeneous \gls{DSL}.
+The interpreter running on the edge device has no knowledge of the higher level task specification.
+It just interprets the byte code it was sent, rewrites the tasks and publishes task values and \gls{SDS} updates.
\section{\texorpdfstring{\Glsxtrlong{TOP}}{Task-oriented programming}}%
\label{sec:back_top}
\Gls{TOP} is a recent declarative programming paradigm for modelling interactive systems \citep{plasmeijer_task-oriented_2012}.
-In \gls{TOP} languages, tasks are the basic building blocks.
-They represent the actual work.
-Instead of dividing problems into layers \gls{TOP} deals with separation of concerns in a novel way.
-From the data types, utilising various \emph{type-parametrised} concepts, all other aspects are handled automatically (see \cref{fig:tosd}).
+Instead of dividing problems into layers, \gls{TOP} deals with separation of concerns in a novel way.
This approach to software development is called \gls{TOSD} \citep{wang_maintaining_2018}.
\begin{figure}
\end{figure}
\begin{description}
- \item[\Gls{UI}:]
- The \gls{UI} of the system is automatically generated from the structural representation of the type.
- Though, practical \gls{TOP} systems allow tweaking afterwards to suit the specific needs of the application.
+ \item[Types:]
+ As can be seen from \cref{fig:tosd}, types are the pivotal component in \gls{TOP}.
+ From the data types, utilising various \emph{type-parametrised} concepts, all other aspects are handled automatically.
+ Hence, all other components arise from and depend on the types in the program.
\item[Tasks:]
+ In \gls{TOP} languages, tasks are the basic building blocks.
A task is an abstract representation of a piece of work that needs to be done.
It provides an intuitive abstraction over work in the real world.
- Tasks are observable during execution.
- It is possible to observe a---partial---result and act upon it, e.g.\ by starting new tasks.
+ The nature of tasks makes them observable during execution.
+ It is possible to observe a---partial---typed result and act upon it, e.g.\ taking the partial result as good enough, or by starting new tasks.
Examples of tasks are filling forms, sending emails, reading sensors or even doing physical tasks.
Just as with real-life tasks, multiple tasks can be combined in various ways such as in parallel or in sequence to form workflows.
Such combination operators are called task combinators.
\item[\Glspl{SDS}:]
Tasks mainly communicate using their observable task values.
- However, some collaboration requires tasks that are not necessarily related to share data.
+ However, some collaboration patterns are more easily expressed by tasks that share common data.
\Glspl{SDS} fill this gap, they offer a safe abstraction over any data.
- An \gls{SDS} can represent typed data stored in a file, a chunk of memory, a database \etc.
+ An \gls{SDS} can represent typed data stored in a file, a chunk of memory, a database, \etc.
\Glspl{SDS} can also represent external impure data such as the time, random numbers or sensor data.
- In many \gls{TOP} langauges, combinators are available to filter, combine, transform, and focus \glspl{SDS}.
+ In many \gls{TOP} languages, combinators are available to filter, combine, transform, and focus \glspl{SDS}.
+ \item[\Gls{UI}:]
+ The \gls{UI} of the system is automatically generated from the structural representation of the type.
+ Though, practical \gls{TOP} systems allow tweaking afterwards to suit the specific needs of the application.
\item[\Gls{UOD}:]
The \gls{UOD} is explicitly and separately modelled by the relations that exist in the functions of the host language.
\end{description}
\Cref{fig:tosd} differs from the presented \gls{IOT} architecture because they represent separate concepts.
-The \gls{IOT} architecture from \cref{fig:iot-layers} describes an execution architecture wheras the \gls{TOSD} figure describes a softwared development model.
+The \gls{IOT} architecture from \cref{fig:iot-layers} describes an execution architecture whereas the \gls{TOSD} figure describes a software development model.
E.g.\ from a software development perspective, a task is a task, whether it is executed on a microcontroller, a server or a client.
Only once a task is executed, the location of the execution becomes important, but this is taken care of by the system.
Some concepts from the \gls{TOSD} model can be mapped upon the \gls{IOT} architecture though.
Firstly, edge devices can be seen as simple resources, thus accessed through \glspl{SDS}.
The second view is that edge devices contain miniature \gls{TOP} systems in itself.
The individual components in the miniature systems, the tasks, the \glspl{SDS}, are, in the eventual execution, connected to the main system.
-\todo{ik ben niet echt te\-vre\-den met deze \P}
\subsection{\texorpdfstring{\Gls{ITASK}}{ITask}}
The concept of \gls{TOP} originated from the \gls{ITASK} framework, a declarative language and \gls{TOP} engine for defining interactive multi-user distributed web applications.
\Gls{ITASK} is implemented as an \gls{EDSL} in the lazy pure \gls{FP} language \gls{CLEAN} \citep{plasmeijer_itasks:_2007,plasmeijer_task-oriented_2012}.
-From the structural properties of the data types, the entire user interface is automatically generated.
+From the structural properties of the data types and the current status of the work to be done, the entire \gls{UI} is automatically generated.
Browsers are powering \gls{ITASK}'s presentation layer.
The framework is built on top of standard web techniques such as JavaScript, HTML, and {CSS}.
\Gls{ITASK} code running in the browser relies on an interpreter that operates on \gls{CLEAN}'s intermediate language \gls{ABC} \citep{staps_lazy_2019}.
+
Tasks in \gls{ITASK} have either \emph{no value}, an \emph{unstable} or a \emph{stable} task value.
For example, an editor for filling in a form initially has no value.
Once the user entered a complete value, its value becomes an unstable value, it can still be changed or even reverted to no value by emptying the editor again.
-Only when for example a continue button is pressed, a task becomes stable, fixing its value.
+Only when for example a continue button is pressed, a task value becomes stable, fixing its value.
The allowed task value transitions are shown in \cref{fig:taskvalue}.
-\begin{figure}[ht]
+\begin{figure}
\centering
\includestandalone{taskvalue}
\caption{Transition diagram for task values in \gls{ITASK}.}%
As an example, \cref{lst:todo,fig:todo} show the code and \gls{UI} for an interactive to-do list application.
The user can modify a shared to-do list through an editor directly or using some predefined actions.
Furthermore, in parallel, the length of the list is shown to demonstrate \glspl{SDS}.
+Using \gls{ITASK}, complex collaborations of users and tasks can be described on a high level.
+
From the data type definitions (\cref{lst:todo_dt}), using generic programming (\cref{lst:todo_derive}), the \glspl{UI} for the data types are automatically generated.
Then, using the parallel task combinator (\cleaninline{-\|\|}) that uses the left-hand side's result the task for updating the to-dos (\cref{lst:todo_update}) and the task for viewing the length are combined (\cref{lst:todo_length}).
Both tasks operate on the to-do \gls{SDS} (\cref{lst:todo_sds}).
The actions either change the value, sorting or clearing it, or terminates the task by returning the current value of the \gls{SDS}.
Special combinators (e.g.\ \cleaninline{@>>} at \cref{lst:todo_ui}) are used to tweak the \gls{UI} to display informative labels.
+\cleaninputlisting[float=,firstline=6,lastline=22,tabsize=3,numbers=left,caption={The code for the shared to-do list in \gls{ITASK}\footnotemark.},label={lst:todo}]{lst/sharedlist.icl}
+\footnotetext{\Cref{chp:clean_for_haskell_programmers} contains a guide for \gls{CLEAN} tailored to \gls{HASKELL} programmers.}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.75\linewidth]{todo0g}
\label{fig:todo}
\end{figure}
-\cleaninputlisting[float=,firstline=6,lastline=22,tabsize=3,numbers=left,caption={The code for the shared to-do list in \gls{ITASK}\footnotemark.},label={lst:todo}]{lst/sharedlist.icl}
-\footnotetext{\Cref{chp:clean_for_haskell_programmers} contains a guide for \gls{CLEAN} tailored to \gls{HASKELL} programmers.}
-
\subsection{\texorpdfstring{\Gls{MTASK}}{MTask}}
-\Gls{ITASK} seems an obvious candidate at first glance for extending \gls{TOP} to \gls{IOT} edge devices.
-However, \gls{IOT} edge devices are in general not powerful enough to run or interpret \gls{CLEAN}\slash\gls{ABC} code, they just lack the processor speed and the memory.
-To bridge this gap, \gls{MTASK} was developed, a \gls{TOP} system for \gls{IOT} edge devices that is integrated in \gls{ITASK} \citep{koopman_task-based_2018}.
+The behaviour of \gls{IOT} edge devices can often be succinctly described by \gls{TOP} programs.
+Software on microcontrollers is usually composed of smaller basic tasks, are interactive, and share data with other components or the server.
+\Gls{ITASK} seems an obvious candidate at first glance for extending \gls{TOP} to \gls{IOT} edge device.
+An \gls{ITASK} application contains many features that are not needed on \emph{edge devices} such as first-order tasks, support for a distributed architecture, or a multi-user web server.
+Furthermore, \gls{IOT} edge devices are in general not powerful enough to run or interpret \gls{CLEAN}\slash\gls{ABC} code, they just lack the processor speed and the memory.
+To bridge this gap, \gls{MTASK} was developed, a domain-specific \gls{TOP} system for \gls{IOT} edge devices that is integrated in \gls{ITASK} \citep{koopman_task-based_2018}.
\Gls{ITASK} abstracts away from details such as user interfaces, data storage, client-side platforms, and persistent workflows.
On the other hand, \gls{MTASK} offers abstractions for edge layer-specific details such as the heterogeneity of architectures, platforms, and frameworks; peripheral access; (multi) task scheduling; and lowering energy consumption.
+
+\Gls{MTASK} is seamlessly integrated with \gls{ITASK}: \gls{MTASK} tasks are integrated in such a way that they function as \gls{ITASK} tasks, and \glspl{SDS} on the device can tether an \gls{ITASK} \gls{SDS}.
+Using \gls{MTASK}, the programmer can define all layers of an \gls{IOT} system as a single declarative specification.
The \gls{MTASK} language is written in \gls{CLEAN} as a multi-view \gls{EDSL} and hence there are multiple interpretations possible.
The byte code compiler is the most relevant for this thesis.
From an \gls{MTASK} task constructed at run time, a compact binary representation of the work that needs to be done is compiled.
This byte code is then sent to a device that running the \gls{MTASK} \gls{RTS}.
This feather-light domain-specific \gls{OS} is written in portable \gls{C} with a minimal device specific interface and functions as a \gls{TOP} engine.
-\Gls{MTASK} is seamlessly integrated with \gls{ITASK}: \gls{MTASK} tasks are integrated in such a way that they function as \gls{ITASK} tasks, and \glspl{SDS} on the device can tether an \gls{ITASK} \gls{SDS}.
-Using \gls{MTASK}, the programmer can define all layers of an \gls{IOT} system as a single declarative specification.
\Cref{lst:intro_blink,fig:intro_blink} shows the \gls{ITASK} part of the code and a screenshot of an interactive \imtask{} application for blinking \pgls{LED} on the microcontroller every dynamically changeable interval.
Using \cleaninline{enterInformation}, the connection specification of the \gls{TCP} device is queried (\cref{lst:intro_enterDevice}).
-\Cref{lst:intro_withshared} defines \pgls{SDS} to communicate the blinking interval.
-Then the \gls{MTASK} is connected using \cleaninline{withDevice} at \cref{lst:intro_withdevice}.
-Once connected, the \cleaninline{intBlink} task is sent to the device (\cref{lst:intro_liftmtask}) and, in parallel, an editor is shown that updates the value of the interval \gls{SDS} (\cref{lst:intro_editor}).
+\Cref{lst:intro_withshared} defines \pgls{SDS} to communicate the blinking interval between the server and the edge device.
+The \gls{MTASK} is connected using \cleaninline{withDevice} at \cref{lst:intro_withdevice}.
+Once connected, the \cleaninline{intBlink} task is sent to the device (\cref{lst:intro_liftmtask}) and, in parallel, a web editor is shown that updates the value of the interval \gls{SDS} (\cref{lst:intro_editor}).
To allow ending the task, the \gls{ITASK} task ends with a sequential operation that returns a constant value when the button is pressed, making the task stable.
\cleaninputlisting[firstline=10,lastline=18,numbers=left,caption={The \gls{ITASK} code for the interactive blinking application.},label={lst:intro_blink}]{lst/blink.icl}
\subsection{Other \texorpdfstring{\glsxtrshort{TOP}}{TOP} languages}
While \gls{ITASK} conceived \gls{TOP}, it is not the only \gls{TOP} system.
-Some \gls{TOP} systems arose from Master's and Bachelor's thesis projects.
-For example, \textmu{}Task \citep{piers_task-oriented_2016}, a \gls{TOP} language for modelling non-interruptible embedded systems in \gls{HASKELL}, and LTasks \citep{van_gemert_task_2022}, a \gls{TOP} language written in the dynamically typed programming language {LUA}.
Some \gls{TOP} languages were created to fill a gap encountered in practise.
Toppyt \citep{lijnse_toppyt_2022} is a general purpose \gls{TOP} language written in \gls{PYTHON} used to host frameworks for modelling \emph{Command\&Control} systems, and hTask \citep{lubbers_htask_2022}, a vessel for experimenting with asynchronous \glspl{SDS}.
-Finally there are \gls{TOP} languages with strong academic foundations.
+Furthermore, some \gls{TOP} systems arose from Master's and Bachelor's thesis projects.
+For example, \textmu{}Task \citep{piers_task-oriented_2016}, a \gls{TOP} language for modelling non-interruptible embedded systems in \gls{HASKELL}, and LTasks \citep{van_gemert_task_2022}, a \gls{TOP} language written in the dynamically typed programming language {LUA}.
+Finally, there are \gls{TOP} languages with strong academic foundations.
\Gls{TOPHAT} is a fully formally specified \gls{TOP} language designed to capture the essence of \gls{TOP} formally \citep{steenvoorden_tophat_2019}.
Such a formal specification allows for symbolic execution, hint generation, but also the translation to \gls{ITASK} for actually performing the work \citep{steenvoorden_tophat_2022}.
\Citeauthor{steenvoorden_tophat_2022} distinguishes two instruments for \gls{TOP}: \gls{TOP} languages and \gls{TOP} engines.
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Other publications on \texorpdfstring{\glspl{EDSL}}{eDSLs}:}
-Furthermore, I co-authored another paper that is worth mentioning but is not part of the \gls{MTASK} system yet and hence not part of the dissertation.
+Furthermore, I co-authored another paper that is not part of the \gls{MTASK} system yet and hence not part of the dissertation.
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item \emph{Strongly-Typed Multi-View Stack-Based Computations} \citep{koopman_strongly-typed_2022}\label{enum:stack-based} shows how to create type-safe \glspl{EDSL} representing stack-based computations.
\item \emph{A Task-Based \glsxtrshort{DSL} for Microcomputers} \citep{koopman_task-based_2018}
is the initial \gls{TOP}\slash{}\gls{MTASK} paper.
It provides an overview of the initial \gls{TOP} \gls{MTASK} language and shows first versions of some interpretations.
- \item \emph{Task Oriented Programming for the Internet of Things} \citep{lubbers_task_2018}\footnotetext{This work is an extension of my Master's thesis \citep{lubbers_task_2017}.}
+ \item \emph{Task Oriented Programming for the Internet of Things} \citep{lubbers_task_2018}\footnotetext{This work is an extension of my Master's thesis \citeyearpar{lubbers_task_2017}.}
shows how a simple imperative variant of \gls{MTASK} was integrated with \gls{ITASK}.
While the language was a lot different from later versions, the integration mechanism is still used in \gls{MTASK} today.
% \paragraph{Contribution}
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Contribution:}
-The original imperative predecessors, the \gls{MTASK} language, and their initial interpretations were developed by Pieter Koopman and Rinus Plasmeijer.
-I continued with the language; developed the byte code interpreter, the precursor to the \gls{C} code generation interpretation; the integration with \gls{ITASK}; and the \gls{RTS}.
+The original \gls{MTASK} language, and their initial interpretations were developed by Pieter Koopman and Rinus Plasmeijer.
+I extended the language, developed the byte code interpreter, the integration with \gls{ITASK}, and the \gls{RTS}.
The paper of which I am first author are solely written by me, there were weekly meetings with the co-authors in which we discussed and refined the ideas.
\subsection{\nameref{prt:tvt}}
\Cref{prt:tvt} is based on a journal paper that quantitatively and qualitatively compares traditional \gls{IOT} architectures with \gls{IOT} systems using \gls{TOP} and contains a single chapter.
This chapter is based on the conference paper and a journal paper extending it:
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
- \item \emph{Tiered versus Tierless IoT Stacks: Comparing Smart Campus Software Architectures} \citep{lubbers_tiered_2020}\footnote{This work was partly funded by the 2019 Radboud-Glasgow Collaboration Fund.}\label{enum:iot20} compares traditional tiered programming to tierless architectures by comparing two implementations of a smart-campus application.
+ \item \emph{Tiered versus Tierless \glsxtrshort{IOT} Stacks: Comparing Smart Campus Software Architectures} \citep{lubbers_tiered_2020}\footnote{This work was partly funded by the 2019 Radboud-Glasgow Collaboration Fund.}\label{enum:iot20} compares traditional tiered programming to tierless architectures by comparing two implementations of a smart-campus application.
\item \emph{Could Tierless Programming Reduce IoT Development Grief?} \citep{lubbers_could_2022}
is an extended version of paper~\ref{enum:iot20}.
It compares programming traditional tiered architectures to tierless architectures by illustrating a qualitative and a quantitative four-way comparison of a smart-campus application.
repositories / phd-thesis.git / blobdiff