But how good are the results of these tools. I ofter heard from people experimenting with autogenerators/translators, that the effort correcting the results of them was higher than the manual porting. At which level are these statements correct? And how matured are those tools nowadays?
There were a few constructs depracated, but that was because they were very rarely used. SV should accept all legal Verilog except for those. Sorry I am not of the list of features that were depracted.
What are compatability / portability issues? Say I have a design from 2006 that a customer wants to use as a baseline and add features and functions to today in SystemVerilog, with the code as a deliverable?
There was a question about SystemC having a hole. Not sure I understood the question.
I was reffering to the "design gap" between a systemC model and the porting towards HDL. If I understood the 'caveats' slide correctly, I'd assume that there exists a similar gap regarding the workflow inbetween the single parts of the systemverilog language as well. Or ist more complete (OOP -> RTL)?
what is the difference between UVM and systemverilog standard class based verification? Can I use these methods to verify a small design ? I need to get started with systemverilog and looking forward to know how to get handson ?
Has constraint compilation improved with the use of SV? I remember with Specman (e) that sometimes the tool would try to resolve your random constraints for 30min, only to let you know at the end that you had a deadlock...
The big difference is the way it does checking and the default condition. Impllied registers used to be created for cases that were not covered and that was nnot always wanted."comb" says there should be no register.
Ah Superlog. Some of my old buddies were at that company - the original Hilo team. Phil Moorbey then left the team and created a new version that was called AidSim. Anyone want to guess what it was renamed when the aids epidemic hit the headlines?
The streaming audio player will appear on this web page when the show starts at 2 p.m. ET today. Note, however, that some companies block live audio streams. If you don't hear any audio when the show starts, try refreshing your browser.
@brian_bailey: I'm just here for the chat this early. Sometimes there are some good questions asked. Other times we talk about coffee. I don't have an espresso machine. And I'm happy they took out the sugar alcohol from the sugar free coffee flavors. Sugar alcohol is still sugar and I'm on insulin.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.