Maude-help mailing list

[Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy AT gmail.com>]

I have solved this problem. But, again, in a very ugly way.

Basically, I created a new LOOP-MODE that includes FULL-MAUDE and then
defined a new "[init]" rule that adds my new module to the system. I
will experiment with a more general way of adding commands to
FULL-MAUDE.

TIA

Jay


On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:30:26 -0400, Jay McCarthy 
<jay.mccarthy AT gmail.com>
 wrote:
> This seems like it is a FAQ but I have not been able to find the
> answer after much searching and it displeases me to have to ask, so
> apologies.
> 
> I have a Core Maude system module, META-DFA, that takes a
> specification of a DFA and turns it into the meta-representation of a
> Maude module that implements that machine. Currently, the META-DFA
> allows the user to reduce an equation "apply( D, S )" where D is the
> DFA spec and S is a list of symbols. This transforms the DFA spec into
> a meta-module, then uses metaRewrite to run it, and feeds it the
> translated S meta-representation.
> 
> That all works fine.
> 
> But, I think it has a messy interface. I'd like to enable META-DFA to
> add a new Module to the system, from its meta-representation. So that
> the user can then run "reduce in DFA-1 : blah blah blah" after running
> "reduce in META-DFA : define DFA-1 spec ...".
> 
> Is there a cookie-cutter way of doing this?
> It seems to me that Full Maude should be able to do this, but it is
> unclear to me whether META-DFA would be written in Full Maude or just
> use Full Maude.
> 
> Before I hurt myself and wrote a LOOP-MODE to do something like this,
> I thought I would ask on this list.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Jay McCarthy
> 
> p.s. I can send the code file if required.
> 
> --
> Jay McCarthy 
> <jay.mccarthy AT gmail.com>
> 



-- 
Jay McCarthy 
<jay.mccarthy AT gmail.com>
http://www.makeoutcity.com/