Looking for VHDL consult.

[Ken Smith]

In article <c8ge2111cr4@news3.newsguy.com>,
Chris Carlen <crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote:

Ken Smith wrote:
In article <c8e9f9112q9@news3.newsguy.com>,
Chris Carlen <crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote:
[...]

[..]
Basically they rank them like this:

Assembler
Basic
C
C++
ADA
Spreadsheets


Basic before C ?!?!?

Shouldn't Basic be below ADA and above spreadsheets?

It depends on which basic somewhat. Dartmouth Basic would be before C but
advanced versions like the ZX81's basic should be after it. The
spreadsheet doesn't really even belong in the same list because you can't
write a large program in it.

Where would you put HDLs like VHDL and Verilog on the list, or are they
on a seperate list?

They would put the VHDL on a list right after motherhood and freedom.
Remember they are trying to sell it not classify it. Chance are they
would put it after the ADA and leave the spreadsheet off the list.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Chris Carlen]

Ken Smith wrote:

In article <c8ge8401doa@news3.newsguy.com>,
Chris Carlen <crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote:
[...]

The point of my question was that I'd consider an HDL to be as low-level
as one can get, considering it's used to describe the hardware that
comes before even the assembler language can run on anything.


Take a look at CUPL, PALASM and ABEL to see a lower level language. In
those you actually get to talk about flop-flops and macro cells etc. I
expect that if I was using PALASM I'd be done by now.

I almost considered ABEL, until the folks at comp.arch.fpga convinced me
to go with one of VHDL or Verilog. But I'd agree it's about the lowest
level, along with the others you mentioned.

I don't hesitate to use gate level and structural modeling in Verilog,
which is quite appropriate for relatively small logic designs like much
of what I do. It's still easier to edit and modify than a graphic
schematic diagram. Though schematics are nicer to read sometimes.


Good day!


--
____________________________________
Christopher R. Carlen
Principal Laser/Optical Technologist
Sandia National Laboratories CA USA
crcarle@sandia.gov

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Wed, 19 May 2004 22:09:42 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
kensmith@violet.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in <c8glv6$ghd$4@blue.rahul.net>:

In article <c8g91i$3aa$1@news.epidc.co.kr>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
Don't forget Java! It subsumes everything, according to most manager types!
Java sucks for speed.
It has no pointers like C.

Actually the pointers are there, they are just hidden under a layer of BS
and you can't do math with them. When you pass a complex type you infact
pass a pointer and not the object its self. This is the same mistake that
is in C and C++ so many people don't see it until they change the type of
something in a working program and discover all sorts of new side effects.
Pointers are fun, when you understand it, I came from asm. so the pointer

was the first thing I understood...
But you can get funny things, list of structures with elements that are also
in other structures, free one of these, and something else is no longer there.
This in C.
But when I really want to know what goes where, program a PIC in asm
JP

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Wed, 19 May 2004 22:14:42 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
kensmith@violet.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in <c8gm8i$ghd$5@blue.rahul.net>:

This may lead you to ask the question "who is this they and what do they
know about anything?"
Aliens, they know everything

;-)

 

[Rolavine]

Someone that I respect said that the excellent open office org office suite
programs (used to be star office) were writen in Java. Anyone know if that is
true, if it is I have to increase my respect for that language.

Rocky

 

[Anthony C Smith]

"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c8gkko$9on$1@news.epidc.co.kr...

On a sunny day (Wed, 19 May 2004 12:54:42 -0700) it happened Chris Carlen
crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote in <c8ge2111cr4@news3.newsguy.com>:

Ken Smith wrote:
In article <c8e9f9112q9@news3.newsguy.com>,
Chris Carlen <crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote:
[...]

High level language? Higher than what


The "high level language" term is a marketing term. It has no real
meaning. It is very like the "forth generation language" term that was
so
common a few years ago. It is how stuff gets sold to managers.

Basically they rank them like this:

Assembler
Basic
C
C++
ADA
Spreadsheets


Basic before C ?!?!?

Shouldn't Basic be below ADA and above spreadsheets?

Where would you put HDLs like VHDL and Verilog on the list, or are they
on a seperate list?
HDL, well although Verilog syntax is a bit like C, it is a very different
beast, but alas put it with assembler or C.
BASIC is difficult, I understand why it was put next to assembler.
But there are many versions of BASIC.
The first ones did not even have decent labels, the line numbers were a
BIG
annoying thing (when adding code), assembler was often much easier!
But BASIC has evolved.... even compilers for it.
But I like assembler and C.
And I use Verilog.
There was also once Pascal, not very familiar with it.
I write huge programs in C, never a problem.
JP
ONCE Pascal? what about DELPHI? far better than C(++) and basically Pascal

with object extensions,
we also use Pascal for embedded work on AVR processors and this is far
better than the C versions, reducing debug and time to market. I rate it up
there (down there) .


Anthony C Smith
"If at first you don't succeed give up- no point in making a fool of
yourself" - Homer (Simpson)

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <20040520025810.16549.00001773@mb-m04.aol.com>,
Rolavine <rolavine@aol.com> wrote:

Someone that I respect said that the excellent open office org office suite
programs (used to be star office) were writen in Java. Anyone know if that is
true, if it is I have to increase my respect for that language.

Last week I did a XY graph with 4096 points. Since I'm still waiting for
it to draw, I think it may be true.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <c8ibkq$15q$1@sparta.btinternet.com>,
Anthony C Smith <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
[...]

ONCE Pascal? what about DELPHI? far better than C(++) and basically Pascal
with object extensions,
we also use Pascal for embedded work on AVR processors and this is far
better than the C versions, reducing debug and time to market. I rate it up
there (down there) .

I write a lot of software in Borland Pascal 7.0. It has all that nice
object stuff, a good virtual method dispatcher and strict type checking.

The whole IDE runs quite nicely in the DOSEMU under Linux so I can even
run it at home.

The main difference between Pascal and C++ is what happens if the program
has a mistake in it. In Pascal you get a run time error. C++ has a
default behavour of reformating your hard disk on error.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 20 May 2004 13:25:47 +0000 (UTC)) it happened "Anthony C
Smith" <acs@mapsoncurrent-thinking.com> wrote in
<c8ibkq$15q$1@sparta.btinternet.com>:

"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c8gkko$9on$1@news.epidc.co.kr...
On a sunny day (Wed, 19 May 2004 12:54:42 -0700) it happened Chris Carlen
crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote in <c8ge2111cr4@news3.newsguy.com>:

Ken Smith wrote:
In article <c8e9f9112q9@news3.newsguy.com>,
Chris Carlen <crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote:
[...]

High level language? Higher than what


The "high level language" term is a marketing term. It has no real
meaning. It is very like the "forth generation language" term that was
so
common a few years ago. It is how stuff gets sold to managers.

Basically they rank them like this:

Assembler
Basic
C
C++
ADA
Spreadsheets


Basic before C ?!?!?

Shouldn't Basic be below ADA and above spreadsheets?

Where would you put HDLs like VHDL and Verilog on the list, or are they
on a seperate list?
HDL, well although Verilog syntax is a bit like C, it is a very different
beast, but alas put it with assembler or C.
BASIC is difficult, I understand why it was put next to assembler.
But there are many versions of BASIC.
The first ones did not even have decent labels, the line numbers were a
BIG
annoying thing (when adding code), assembler was often much easier!
But BASIC has evolved.... even compilers for it.
But I like assembler and C.
And I use Verilog.
There was also once Pascal, not very familiar with it.
I write huge programs in C, never a problem.
JP
ONCE Pascal? what about DELPHI? far better than C(++) and basically Pascal
with object extensions,
we also use Pascal for embedded work on AVR processors and this is far
better than the C versions, reducing debug and time to market. I rate it up
there (down there) .
OK, OK, 'once' for me because I ported some Pascal to C years and years ago.

I know there is a Pascal compiler for Linux, but also for lisp, and many
other languages.
Portability may be the problem here, you are likely to find a C compiler,
but not so likely to find a Pascal compiler for a new processor.
Not that microcomputer C is realy portable, no.
JP

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (20 May 2004 06:58:10 GMT) it happened rolavine@aol.com
(Rolavine) wrote in <20040520025810.16549.00001773@mb-m04.aol.com>:

Someone that I respect said that the excellent open office org office suite
programs (used to be star office) were writen in Java. Anyone know if that is
true, if it is I have to increase my respect for that language.

Rocky
That would explain why staroffice is so f*cking slow.

But I use it to print enveloppes.
JP

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 20 May 2004 14:54:19 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
kensmith@violet.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in <c8igqr$dm3$3@blue.rahul.net>:

The whole IDE runs quite nicely in the DOSEMU under Linux so I can even
run it at home.

The main difference between Pascal and C++ is what happens if the program
has a mistake in it. In Pascal you get a run time error. C++ has a
default behavour of reformating your hard disk on error.
Not in Linux it don't!

I think there is a Pascal for Linux too.
JP

 

[Rolavine]

Subject: Re: Looking for VHDL consult.
From: Jan Panteltje pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com
Date: 5/20/2004 9:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <c8il5s$fnv$1@news.epidc.co.kr

On a sunny day (20 May 2004 06:58:10 GMT) it happened rolavine@aol.com
(Rolavine) wrote in <20040520025810.16549.00001773@mb-m04.aol.com>:

Someone that I respect said that the excellent open office org office suite
programs (used to be star office) were writen in Java. Anyone know if that
is
true, if it is I have to increase my respect for that language.

Rocky
That would explain why staroffice is so f*cking slow.
But I use it to print enveloppes.
JP

Yes, I admit it is slow to start, but it does some very useful things that
Microsoft Office won't, like sucking in DXF files from my cad software. Once it
is running I have not noticed a speed difference between Open Office and
Microsoft. Considering the price, and not supporting the Great Techno Satan,
I'm a happy customer.

Rocky

 

[Rolavine]

Palasm, Able, Cupl and Altera's Max languages can be operated at the level
equivalent to an assembly language in the domain of computer programming. In
all of these languages you can specify the physical input - function - output
functions, using a symbolic representation of the logical structure. In most of
these languages you can even specify the fuse numbers inside the device your
going to use and set that bit.

I have not worked with Palasm for years but I don't think it really supported
any abstractions at all. CUPL and Able had excellent abstractions that allowed
the use of set operations, counters, and conditional (>, <. =) logic functions.
All three languages supported simulation test vectors that could be used to
test your symbolic logic, as well as make actual test vectors for the
programmer to use in verifiying operation of the target part after programming.

I don't know anything about VHDL or Verilog, the nature of being a one man band
company is that you use the easiest and cheapest tools. But can't these fancy
tools operate at the lowest simple non abstracted logic equation levels too,
excepting the actual specifing of individual fuses?

Rocky

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <c8inkj$h56$1@news.epidc.co.kr>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Thu, 20 May 2004 14:54:19 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
kensmith@violet.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in <c8igqr$dm3$3@blue.rahul.net>:

The whole IDE runs quite nicely in the DOSEMU under Linux so I can even
run it at home.

The main difference between Pascal and C++ is what happens if the program
has a mistake in it. In Pascal you get a run time error. C++ has a
default behavour of reformating your hard disk on error.
Not in Linux it don't!

It trys but the (real) OS catches the attempt to trash things out before
they happen and dumps the program out. Some other OS takes a different
tack. They catch the fact that the hard disk was corrupted and let you
reinstall everything again.

I think there is a Pascal for Linux too.

Yes and it compiles Borland pascal with almost no problems. The only
thing I've found is that they don't allow the ^X method os specifying a
control character. You have to use the #nn method.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (20 May 2004 16:53:28 GMT) it happened rolavine@aol.com
(Rolavine) wrote in <20040520125328.27424.00001003@mb-m24.aol.com>:

Subject: Re: Looking for VHDL consult.
From: Jan Panteltje pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com
Date: 5/20/2004 9:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <c8il5s$fnv$1@news.epidc.co.kr

On a sunny day (20 May 2004 06:58:10 GMT) it happened rolavine@aol.com
(Rolavine) wrote in <20040520025810.16549.00001773@mb-m04.aol.com>:

Someone that I respect said that the excellent open office org office suite
programs (used to be star office) were writen in Java. Anyone know if that
is
true, if it is I have to increase my respect for that language.

Rocky
That would explain why staroffice is so f*cking slow.
But I use it to print enveloppes.
JP

Yes, I admit it is slow to start, but it does some very useful things that
Microsoft Office won't, like sucking in DXF files from my cad software. Once it
is running I have not noticed a speed difference between Open Office and
Microsoft. Considering the price, and not supporting the Great Techno Satan,
I'm a happy customer.

Rocky
Oh yes, I staroffice it in Linux, never used MS office.

But it is still slow.
There is also open-office, the open source variant, I have it on some CD,
but since staroffice does all I need, I have not installed it.
JP

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (20 May 2004 17:05:57 GMT) it happened rolavine@aol.com
(Rolavine) wrote in <20040520130557.27424.00001004@mb-m24.aol.com>:

I don't know anything about VHDL or Verilog, the nature of being a one man band
company is that you use the easiest and cheapest tools. But can't these fancy
tools operate at the lowest simple non abstracted logic equation levels too,
excepting the actual specifing of individual fuses?
I dunno about fuses, I use Icarus verilog in Linux, and xilinx webpack in

windows.
It seems to also be able to run in Linux wine, but something screwd up in
the editor in my case.
Verilog is a HDL hardware description language, and you can construct
you logic with it in the form of gates of cause.
Make modules, compare that to little circuits, connect these etc..
If you use verilog in something like webpack, what is free, then it
knows such things as gates, registers, io buffers, blockram in the xilinx
FPGAs.
Verilog is simple, but when programming in Verilog (or VHDL) you MUST
remmeber that things happen at the same time.
So not the sequential coding as in a normal programming language, you
are more specifying circuits, the circuits are connected...
You specify input and output, one or more clocks, you can run a simultion,
print out waveforms generated, you need to specify delays.
The software will then take your circuit and map it for example to real
gates (and more complex logic modules) in a FPGA.
Verilog syntax reminds a bit of C syntax, but that is where it ends really.
Programs like webpack also let you enter diagrams, and synthesize that.
In fact there is a whole library of logic stuff, all sorts of flipflops,
shift registers, buffers, quite a bit, but things may not always do what
you expect.
As hardware guy you will perhaps get faster started then as software
guy with HDL.
JP

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 20 May 2004 21:22:00 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
kensmith@violet.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in <c8j7ho$l1d$1@blue.rahul.net>:

In article <c8inkj$h56$1@news.epidc.co.kr>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 20 May 2004 14:54:19 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
kensmith@violet.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in <c8igqr$dm3$3@blue.rahul.net>:

The whole IDE runs quite nicely in the DOSEMU under Linux so I can even
run it at home.

The main difference between Pascal and C++ is what happens if the program
has a mistake in it. In Pascal you get a run time error. C++ has a
default behavour of reformating your hard disk on error.
Not in Linux it don't!

It trys but the (real) OS catches the attempt to trash things out before
they happen and dumps the program out. Some other OS takes a different
tack. They catch the fact that the hard disk was corrupted and let you
reinstall everything again.
Man I tell you, I had one harddisk FAT whipeout in MS windows,

I had a presentation for the company on it for the next day.
MS windows started, it said:
'FAT corrupted, do you want to use the spare one?'
Does one have a choice? So I said yes.

And the other one was corrupted too.
It was NOT MS fault however, it was the old version of RedHat Linux that
did not understand how to handle the > 40GB harddisk, and decided to
write in the MS partition.
This was a kernel issue.
So, bad stuff!
JP

 

[KR Williams]

In article <c8g4n1$aqs$3@blue.rahul.net>,
kensmith@violet.rahul.net says...

In article <38ela01a78gpc4bfpsjj7ujef64nmipquc@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
[... VHDL ...]
High level language? Higher than what?

As in (Digital) Descriptive Languages.


VHDL = (V)ery (H)ard (D)escriptive (L)anguage

VHDL == VLSI Hardware Description Language

or should that be "High"?

Some people think the developers were. ;-)

It allows hardware to be described at a very abstract level that in theory
allows the same code to be compiled and implemented in differing
technologies. This portablity, like the portability of C, is largely a
myth.

It depends on how the code is written. If the appropriate
libraries are used the code can be very portable (just like C).
If the target hardware (or processor) doesn't have equivalent
functions (instructions) it won't be portable. VHDL can be
written to instantiate gates (essentially text schematics) or
with much abstraction. Like C, if the goal is to make the code
portable, it must be written with portability in mind. It's not
automatic, but it can be done.

--
Keith

 

[KR Williams]

In article <0ahna0t801ok9l0p33rr9bgn3apagkdfi3@4ax.com>,
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat says...

On Wed, 19 May 2004 12:57:56 -0700, the renowned Chris Carlen
crcarle@BOGUS.sandia.gov> wrote:

Ken Smith wrote:
In article <38ela01a78gpc4bfpsjj7ujef64nmipquc@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
[... VHDL ...]

High level language? Higher than what?

As in (Digital) Descriptive Languages.



VHDL = (V)ery (H)ard (D)escriptive (L)anguage
or should that be "High"?

It allows hardware to be described at a very abstract level that in theory
allows the same code to be compiled and implemented in differing
technologies. This portablity, like the portability of C, is largely a
myth.

Oh, maybe Jim didn't realize that I know what VHDL is, considering that
I've already implemented a few small projects in Verilog which I'm in
the process of learning.

The point of my question was that I'd consider an HDL to be as low-level
as one can get, considering it's used to describe the hardware that
comes before even the assembler language can run on anything.

From what I've seen of VHDL, I agree with your interpretation of the
VHDL acronym. My view of it is simply "blech!"

Verilog is quite tolerable.

VHDL is ADA-like and Verilog is rather more C-like.

Sure. VHDLs roots are in ADA (DARPA and all that).

--
Keith

 

[KR Williams]

In article <c8glj4$ghd$2@blue.rahul.net>,
kensmith@violet.rahul.net says...

In article <0ahna0t801ok9l0p33rr9bgn3apagkdfi3@4ax.com>,
Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
[..]
VHDL is ADA-like and Verilog is rather more C-like.

I only, sort of agree with the first part. Both ADA and VHDL give you
twelve ways to do everything, but VHDL has lots of syntactic sugar in it
and other things that make it very verbose.

VHDL is verbose, particularly having to define signals four times
but there are tools that seem to make this more manageable. I
rather like structured languages, which is why I prefer VHDL
(though I haven't used much Verilog).

VHDL seems to be the preferred language for FPGAs and Verilog for
ASICs in the US (VHDL in Europe). I'm not really sure why this
is though.

--
Keith