Subject: Re: [vhdl-200x-perf] Re: Performance issues
From: Kevin Cameron x3251 (Kevin.Cameron@nsc.com)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 09:44:42 PDT
> From owner-vhdl-200x-perf@eda.org Wed Apr 30 06:43:14 2003
>
> Kevin and all,
>
> > Personally I'm for adding the functionality and letting the users
> > decide if it's what they want.
>
> <exaggerating for the purposes of illustration>
> Personally, I'd rather not throw a whole bunch of stuff against the wall
> to see what sticks.
> </exaggerating for the purposes of illustration>
>
> Seriously, in '93 we added many things at the behest of the user
> community which have yet to be adopted. This time around, I'd really
> like to get committments and agreement from the tool vendors and user
> community on the utility of proposals for significant features before we
> implement them.
>
> Paul
Performance is usually a trade-off, if you don't trade something you won't
get the speed-up. Your choices are a) add language short-cuts (e.g. blocking
assigns), or b) more complex simulators (parallel processing) or c) do it
all differently (SystemC?).
Language development is evolutionary, if an addition is useful it gets used
and the vendors will keep polishing and extending in that direction (even if
it looked like a gross mutation in the first place).
Kev.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 09:45:22 PDT