www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
> Do you have any suggestion for a less ambiguous syntax? We resolve ambiguity by documenting what we expect. The question is, which syntax makes the most sense for us - what would present the "least surprise" to the user? I think in this case, choosing between: * Pascal * Ada * An obscure GCC extension[*] * Verilog Verilog is the obvious choice here, because it's a modern, relevent (to us), and commonly used language. For projects with both layout and fpga it would be "natural" to use the same bus syntax for both cases. We can then document *extensions* to this syntax if we need to, for example "lists of signals" might require a comma-separated list like "netname=nWR,nRD,nCS,A[15:0],D[8:0]". [*] I'm a gcc maintainer and even I keep forgetting it's there ;-)
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |