Quoting "David G. Koontz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
{...}
> Citeseer is a good place to look, I'm not an IEEE or ACM member, and don't
> currently have access to Springer-Verlag.
Thanks for the references. At least the second paper can be downloaded from
citeseer.
{...}
> It may be worth looking at Tyvis on top of WARPED in Savant now from Clifton
> Labs. I don't think its is being actively maintained or developed, but it
> may be a worth while reference. The Internal Intermediate Rrepresentation
> (IIR) format came from AIRE/CE IIR (Advanced Intermediate Representation
> with Extensibility/Common Environment) done for Savant. The intent of IIR
> appears to have always been a model transformation suitable for parallel
> simulation. Historically multi-threaded meant different systems or at least
> different CPUs.
To be honest I am not convinced by PDES. I fear that in general distribution
cost will be very high. And adapting GHDL to PDES is a large work.
> Today ghdl can't compete directly with commercial offerings, I remember
> when Haneef Mohammed (VHDL Simili) was in the same boat or even a little
> further back when Modelsim wasn't seen as a serious contender around 1991.
> I'd imagine you could set priorities for capturing user mind from commercial
> products, the priority order something like this:
>
> LRM features/compliance
> Simulator features
> Modeling Features
> Tool Integration
> Performance
Interesting order.
For LRM features/compliance I think GHDL is very very good. Perhaps better
than most commercial simulator.
I would have put performance at first. If GHDL performances were about the
same than commercial simulators, it will be way more popular (nightly
regressions for example).
> The order could easily change, too. I can imagine for instance multi HDL
> support driving performance because the 'market' is different. Priority is
> driven by who you can attract to using ghdl, and why.
>
> There are lots of reasons to not try and overspecialize ghdl. In addition
> to the user base currently comprised of us freeloaders and ghdl not yet
> being a mature tool system, the state of commodity platforms has been
> evolving fast enough to stick with the herd. ghdl hasn't been evolving fast
> enough to put a stake in the ground with bleeding edge technology which may
> have reached it's use by date by then. I've personally had all sorts of
> fancy toys over the years, SGI workstations, SPARCs, Alpha processors and
> UltraSPARCs. The return on investment hasn't been there, and I currently
> use a notebook (albeit running Linux).
(Hardware is different from software)
> Maybe we could get Tristan to tell us where and how he sees ghdl going?
> He's commented privately in the past on what he'd like to see worked on.
Well this is very simple. I work on GHDL during my spare time. It's an
free project and contribution are welcome.
I don't have the resources to compete with commercial simulators.
Tristan.
_______________________________________________
Ghdl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
