Subject: RE: [vhdl-200x] Corrections to Minutes for VHDL-200X-FT meeting, San Jose Dec 4, 2003
From: Bailey, Stephen (SBailey@model.com)
Date: Wed Dec 10 2003 - 13:45:52 PST
I'm a software engineer, by training, working in the EDA industry and
having done some digital design as well. I know the benefits of using
mnemonic identifiers as it has been drilled into me since my earliest of
computer science classes.
However, I must admit to not comprehending what is causing all of this
consternation.
Is To_Str not understandable? Is "str" so infrequently used that no one
can be expected to realize it is an abbreviation for "string"?
The benefit of typing fewer characters due to the use of commonly used
abbreviations is just that, a benefit. There is no negative here.
In other areas, we could argue as to whether or not "slv" is an
appropriate abbreviation for "std_logic_vector". However, I would note
that if such abbreviations are part of the standard, they quickly become
accepted in every day usage. That is, after a relatively short
adjustment period, there are no disadvantages.
As example, consider the question of how common place the following
abbreviations were prior to C and C++:
int
uint
char
STL
struct
I'm sure many more examples are possible with the vast experience of the
people in this group.
For VHDL to continue to be successful, we need to improve its
acceptability to those who are not already habitually using it. This is
one way to do so and, done properly, it will not compromise the
readability of the language.
-Steve Bailey
> Jim Lewis wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Short function names, reading of output ports and boolean
> equivalence
> >> are not something I spend my day on wishing I had them. Code
> >> completion (e.g. Emacs VHDL mode) helps mitigating a lot of the
> >> "inconveniences" VHDL users have to face. I see that some proposals
> >> would help gaining acceptance among users of The Other
> HDL, but that
> >> shouldn't be driving us.
> >
> >
> > This feedback is more helpful than you may think.
> > If others also feel this way, it would be helpful
> > to express this in an email to the reflector.
> > This group has alot of pressure on it to make
> > syntax and names shorter.
>
> I use completion on most keywords, so I agree.
> Clarity of the code is of much higher
> value to me. I'm not even sure how
> to spell "architecture", but that's irrelevant
> with a good editor. Most folks
> who like cryptic keywords are already
> using the other HDL.
>
> -- Mike Treseler
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Dec 10 2003 - 13:47:28 PST