[bnr]

The article (controversely, maybe) classifies libraries for general-purpose programming languages as internal DSLs. One could argue that Data Scientists working with libraries in Pythin are already using a DSL, just with an escape hatch into the general-purpose world.

I don't think proper vertical DSLs should be made marketed towards people who are comfortable working in a general-purpose language. I see them as a way to help non-technical domain experts work on code instead of specification. Limiting the possibilities of what one can write, like with MPS' projectional editor, is a feature here and not a bug.

[jamesblonde]

A library is not a DSL, despite what the learned authors may claim. In fact, there are a couple of examples of "successful" DSLs in the data world - you could argue that Talend and DBT are visual programming tools for ETL pipelines. Defintely Zapier- which is just for integrating services that have well-defined REST APIs.