Re: [vhdl-200x] Modular types, alternative solutions

 > > What is wrong with numeric_bit or numeric_std ?  They provide all
 > > the
 > > needs of integer/modular types, but cannot be used easily to index
 > > arrays or as the type of iterator.  Maybe we should concentrate on
 > > that point.
 >
 > What I see often is that you tell here and there "If they aren't fast
 > enough,
 > complain to your vendor.". That argument would gain credence if you
 > led by example ^_^

This is going off topic, but I never had a complaint from a customer...

 > What I complain about, is that the language forces convoluted and
 > heavy operations when the same operator is already provided natively
 > by any CPU, yet the language actively prevents their actual use. Why
 > do we have to "optimise" heavy packages when the solution is already
 > there, a "low-hanging fruit" ? Why would the language work against
 > the user ?

Are numeric_std/numeric_bit convoluted ?  If so, we'd better to address
that issue.

If the language propose different way to do the same thing, I think
the language is wrong.
That may not be true for Perl, but I think this is true for VHDL.

Tristan.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.