Re: [vhdl-200x] VHDL enhancements wish list

All,
It is really too early to talk about syntax of something
other than to help sound out the requirements.

_From Ryan I gathered_:
   I want a more concise way to specify flip-flops and pipelining.

_From Ben, I gathered_:
   Having SystemVerilog-like syntax would be nice.

   _separate requests_
   Minimize package references.
   [jim] Done in VHDL-2008 context declarations

   Use std_logic in conditionals (if (a) then ).
   [jim] Done in VHDL-2008 simplified conditionals

   You can find the VHDL-2008 slides I shared with DASC at:
   http://www.synthworks.com/papers/vhdl_2008_DASC_s.pdf

I will throw in a couple:
For flip-flops, I would like to facilitate the re-use of
intellectual property by having an abstraction that allows
higher level changing of polarity of clock and reset, as
well as, changing between asynchronous and synchronous
reset.

Let me throw out a general question, how do we move
to the next higher level of description where the
amount of pipelining is not known at the start of
the design and perhaps may be different for different
usages of the same block. Are generics effective?
Do we need a way for a synthesis tool to determine
this and feed it back to us?

Some of the C synthesis tools seem to be taking blocks
without flip-flops specified and adding them at
appropriate places. Is this the future? Is there
VHDL syntax that would simplify this process for the tools?

Going back to the SystemVerilog. Always_ff,
always_comb, always_lat assign logic intent to
code and requires a simulator to check for basic
hardware correctness. For me, a synthesis tool
already does this (flags sensitivity list issues,
reports warnings on latches and generally reports on
the flipflops it creates). I don't need the simulator
to do this too. In addition, if we assume "report
all latches" (like a synthesis tool does), and adopt
process(all) for combinational logic and use
rising_edge/falling_edge for all flipflops,
then the information is there - if only I am willing to
pay for a vendor to implement the checks :).

I think we need to keep talking about the requirements
for flip-flop coding and agree upon them before we go
forward and start worrying about the implementation.

Best,
Jim

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Lewis
Director of Training             mailto:Jim@SynthWorks.com
SynthWorks Design Inc.           http://www.SynthWorks.com
1-503-590-4787
Expert VHDL Training for Hardware Design and Verification
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.