[PedroBatista]

I want it. At least the idea of it.

I want something that looks like a programing language ( the mainstream ones ) that describes and specifies the flow of some functionality, not a YAML or a godforsaken XML file but also not XYZ framework that has all the implementation details.

Maybe Jolie isn't what I want and has more baggage than I'm currently aware, but it somehow looks like something I need.

[bluejekyll]

Could you achieve that with a language that has a sufficiently decent meta-programming option, like a macro system? It sounds like what you want is a compile time validated state machine.

[Siira]

Writing a language from scratch is not that different from writing a DSL using powerful macro systems. Does such a DSL already exist?

[bluejekyll]

It depends on what you're looking for. Based on my usage of Rust, I would say that it's proc_macro system is more than capable enough for use-cases like this, and macro_rules migth even be enough.

But lots of languages offer similar capabilities, Nim, Racket, Scala, Julia, Lisp, etc.

[jcelerier]

in C++ it's simple enough that you can build one accidentally https://philippegroarke.com/posts/2020/constexpr_fsm/ :p

[andrewzah]

Would Dhall [0] suffice?

[0]: https://dhall-lang.org/

[rsj_hn]

Is it just a matter of procedurally generating config files? Would that satisfy you?