The article is “addressed to those who did not want to build a compiler”: what's the point of this article then? It seems to implore to not build compilers, but those who did not want to in the first place, probably…
Happy to oblige, even if LWBs are meant to make things less complicated ;)
I have some (paywall) trouble accessing the article you reference, so I cannot really comment, but to me that seems to be describing an IDE, not necessarily a LWB that produces an IDE for a (set of) DSL(s).
Since Racket participated in the Language Workbench Challenge 2016, the answer is a resounding YES :)
The article is “addressed to those who did not want to build a compiler”: what's the point of this article then? It seems to implore to not build compilers, but those who did not want to in the first place, probably…
Happy to oblige, even if LWBs are meant to make things less complicated ;)
I have some (paywall) trouble accessing the article you reference, so I cannot really comment, but to me that seems to be describing an IDE, not necessarily a LWB that produces an IDE for a (set of) DSL(s).
Since Racket participated in the Language Workbench Challenge 2016, the answer is a resounding YES :)