LOGIN   :::   RECOVER PASS   :::   GET ACCOUNT    
Browse
  • Projects
  • Code (CVS)
  • Forums
  • News
  • Articles
  • Polls
  •  
    OpenCores
  • FAQ
  • CVS HowTo
  • Mission
  • Media
  • Tools
  • Advertise
  • Mirrors
  • Logos
  • Contact us
  • Job Opportunity
  •  
    Tools
  • Search
      
  • Download Cores (CVSGet)
  •  
    More
  • Wishbone
  • Perlilog
  • EDA tools
  • OpenTech CD
  •  
    Navigation: All forums > Cores > Message List > Message Post

    Message

    Reply | Reply all
    Date Prev | Date Next | Thread Prev | Thread Next Date Index | Thread Index

    From: Tom Hawkins <tom1@l...>
    Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 09:34:34 -0500
    Subject: Re: [oc] Verilog vs VHDL vs Other
    Top

    On Thursday 22 May 2003 01:39 am, Marko Mlinar wrote:
    >
    > Tom,
    >
    > first thanks for your contribution. I am sure Confluence can be
    > handy in certain cases, e.g. DSP processing, like you already
    > mentioned on your web site.
    >
    > I will try to give you some (much wanted, I suppose) feedback:
    > Although you would probably say Confluence is a complete language
    > unfortunately it does not solve all the todays problems, especially
    > with integration and configuration.
    
    Confluence doesn't solve all todays problems.  But it certainly works 
    well for constructing and validating pure synchronous RTL, which 
    probably accounts for 90% of all logic design.  I would like to hear 
    your concerns with integration and configurations.  Confluence 
    designs are far more configurable than HDL, because every Confluence 
    variable is a "configuration parameter".
    
    > It is also functional language, and this programming paradigm is
    > rather new to both SW and HW people. Who has wrote an application
    > in Huskell, for example? 
    
    Very true.  Ironically, HW designers adapted quicker to functional 
    programming (FP) that SW people.  FP is nothing more that 
    instantiating and wiring components (aka. functions) together -- a 
    concept every RTL designer practices everyday.
    
    Our biggest concern would be how HW designers take to recursive and 
    first class components.  The early Confluence evaluators have shown 
    that these concepts are not a problem.
    
    In fact, we had an FPGA design consultant download the tools on a 
    Friday, spent the weekend learning the language, and by Monday had 
    already finished a large design component he had previously told his 
    customer would take another week to complete.  It wasn't a trivial 
    project either; it involved filtering and color-factor correction of 
    4M pixel camera images.
    
    This comes from a guy who has never used an FP language before in his 
    life.  But because he has a solid RTL background, his transition to 
    Confluence was easy.
    
    > It also has strange grammar, which is
    > neither similar to C neither to Verilog/VHDL, so first impression
    > gives an impression of rather obscure language, although it is very
    > well defined.
    
    Like any language, the grammar does look a little weird at first.  We 
    specifically designed the syntax for instantiating and wiring 
    components.  Once you understand how components are defined and 
    instantiated, and have a grasp of a handful of operators, the syntax 
    becomes clear.  Every time I give a demo, the syntax learning curve 
    is usually only 5 minutes.
    
    >
    > best regards,
    > Marko
    
    Thanks for your input!
    
    Regards,
    Tom
    
    -- 
    Tom Hawkins
    Launchbird Design Systems, Inc.
    952-200-3790
    tom1@l...
    http://www.launchbird.com/
    
    
    
    
    

    ReferenceAuthor
    Re: [oc] Verilog coding style for Open Cores-RTL - Case in pointSHA1Marco Antonio Simon Dal Poz
    [oc] Verilog vs VHDL vs OtherTom Hawkins
    Re: [oc] Verilog vs VHDL vs OtherMarko Mlinar

     
    Copyright (c) 1999 OPENCORES.ORG. All rights reserved.