On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Robert Smolinski <rsmol...@illinois.edu> wrote: > Suraj Kurapati wrote: >> As for the future of this project, I've had some new (rather >> low-level) developments brewing since last year: >> >> * Ruby 1.9 coroutine support[1] for more efficient & consistent >> behavior in all simulators. >> >> [1]: http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2294 >> > > It looks like [1] was a tricky issue to find/solve and that you had a decent > challenge getting it in. It's very cool that you are continuing your work on > the project. I've really enjoyed using your ruby-vpi so far.
Thanks for the encouragement. > It seems to me > that ruby's unique language features are a definite advantage in design > verification. Agreed. > I figured out a work around to get to the array elements using the vpi > function "vpi_handle_by_index", since I can't find the correct argument to > pass to "to_a". This explains why #to_a did not work: it uses vpi_iterate() instead of vpi_handle_by_index(): http://github.com/sunaku/ruby-vpi/blob/master/lib/ruby-vpi/core/handle.rb#L227 Currently there is no accessor implemented that uses vpi_handle_by_index(): http://snk.tuxfamily.org/lib/ruby-vpi/#tbl:accessors > Do you have any further tips / utility functions that you found useful? I'm > trying to find an elegant function to shorten the call to get the interger > value of a wire. See http://snk.tuxfamily.org/lib/ruby-vpi/#vpi.handles > The best I could do seems like overkill: > def IntVal wire_name, module="DUT" > eval(module + "." + wire_name + ".intVal") At first glance, I would change the above line to: module.send(wire_name).intVal because eval() is frowned upon in the Ruby community. It's a necessary evil in some cases, but we generally try to avoid it. Or better yet, you can use the VPI::Handle#/ method[2]: (module / wire_name).intVal which is defined here: http://github.com/sunaku/ruby-vpi/blob/master/lib/ruby-vpi/core/handle.rb#L219 > end Cheers.
