Andrew, I've got to disagree with you here.
Timing waveforms are a succinct way to illustrate relationships between signals. They do a GREAT job in specifications of interfaces in particular. I would wager they do the best job in trying to define interfaces in particular. If you use them in your design efforts initially without worrying about how the nano-seconds, but just which clock something occurs you can also use them to GREAT effect in figuring out how a state machine NEEDS to work in the first place. Timing diagrams still serve a place in my design bag of tricks. Steve Wilson >-- Original Message -- >Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:50:05 +0000 (GMT) >From: Andrew Bardsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Geda-user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Tools for timing diagrams for digital signals >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >On 12 Feb 2003, Egil Kvaleberg wrote: > >> In terms of doing documentation and analysis of digital signals, would >> any of the gEDA tools be suitable? Perhaps GTKWave? > >I don't think GTKWave would be of help, unless you want to print >example waveforms. > >> What I am thinking here is in terms of initial design amd documentation >> of timing and waveforms, not viewing results of simulations. > >Don't draw timing diagrams. Use STGs or state diagrams. >Timing diagrams always become too cluttered when you draw in all >the necessary constraints and too useless to work with when you don't. > >- Andrew > __________________ >___/Dr Andrew Bardsley\_________________________________________ >University of Manchester Dept. of Computer Science Amulet Group >Research Associate bardsleyATcs.man.ac.uk Tel: +44 161 275 6844 >Snail: Room IT302, Man. Uni., Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK >
