

# General Language Reference

You {c,sh,w}ould cite this if:
  * you extended Rascal itself and publish about this
  * you used Rascal as a component of your research method
  * you used Rascal to implement an industrial software project and you wish to credit it


```
@inproceedings{RascalGTTSE,
    title = {EASY Meta-Programming with Rascal. Leveraging the Extract-Analyze-SYnthesize Paradigm for Meta-Programming},
    author = {Paul  Klint and Tijs van der Storm and Jurgen J.  Vinju},
    year = {2010},
    booktitle = {Proceedings of the 3rd International Summer School on Generative and Transformational Techniques in Software Engineering (GTTSE'09)},
    location = {Braga, Portugal},
    series = {LNCS},
    publisher = {Springer},
}
```

# Software Analysis and Transformation (Refactoring)

You {c,sh,w}ould cite this if:
  * you are working on related work want to position w.r.t. Rascal's features
  * you used Rascal as a component of your own tool 

```
@inproceedings{rascal,
	  Author = {Paul Klint and Tijs van der Storm and Jurgen J. Vinju},
	  Title = {RASCAL: A Domain Specific Language for Source Code Analysis and Manipulation},
	  Booktitle = {Ninth IEEE International Working Conference on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM)},
	  Doi = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/SCAM.2009.28},
	  Pages = {168-177},
	  Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society},
	  Year = {2009},
}
```

# Specific Releases

Here some citable zenodo snapshots, which you could cite instead of the above papers. The difference is you credit more the implementation of
the work than the conceptual contribution of Rascal. It's up to you. The author lists are different necessarily. So if you depend on a particular
piece of work inside Rascal authored by somebody who is not an author of the above papers, then this might have your preference.

* https://zenodo.org/record/7595297


		
