  Our community believes that new domain-specific languages should be as
general as possible to increase their impact. However, I argue in this essay
that we should stop claiming generality for new domain-specific languages. More
general domain-specific languages induce more boilerplate code. Moreover,
domain-specific languages are co-developed with their applications in practice,
and tend to be specific for these applications. Thus, I argue we should stop
claiming generality in favor of documenting how domain-specific language based
software development is beneficial to the overall software development process.
The acceptance criteria for scientific literature should make the same shift:
accepting good domain-specific language engineering practice, instead of the
next language to rule them all.
